Using Blood Wisely: lessons learnt in establishing a national implementation programme to reduce inappropriate red blood cell transfusion

BACKGROUND

Up to 50% of blood is transfused inappropriately despite best evidence. In 2020, Choosing Wisely Canada launched a major national programme, 'Using Blood Wisely', the aim was to engage hospitals to audit their red blood cell transfusion use against national benchmarks and participate in a programme to decrease inappropriate use.

STUDY DESIGN

Using Blood Wisely is a quality improvement programme including national benchmarks, an audit tool, recommended evidence-based effective interventions and a designation to reward success. Hospital engagement was measured using the number of hospitals signing up, performing a baseline audit, submitting the planning survey, entering two or more audits and achieving hospital designation. Barriers to implementation were collected.

RESULTS

From 1 September 2020 to 31 December 2022, 229 individual hospitals signed up over time to participate. Their results are reported as 159 hospitals and hospital groups. Collectively, this accounts for 72% of the blood used in Canada. Overall, 147 (92%) performed a baseline audit, 10 (6%) submitted a planning survey and 130 (82%) entered two or more audits. At baseline (time of enrolment), 75 (51%) met both benchmarks. The designation was awarded to 62 (39%) hospital groups (a total of 105 individual hospitals) that met and sustained benchmarks. Barriers to implementation included human resource shortages, lack of local expertise to advise the team, need for more education of transfusion prescribers and competing priorities.

CONCLUSION

In its initial phase, Using Blood Wisely engaged a substantial number of hospitals in transfusion quality improvement work and maintained that engagement. This large-scale engagement across a big country was more successful than anticipated. Additional efforts are needed to rigorously evaluate the programme's impact on utilisation.

Baseline Inappropriate Antibiotic Use in Primary Care Patients with Viral Respiratory Tract Infections with 2019 and 2020

Context: Respiratory tract infection (RTI) is the leading cause of avoidable antimicrobial use in primary care. How the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted antibiotic prescribing practices across Canada is unknown. The purpose of this study was to examine rates of antibiotic prescribing for RTI in primary care during the first year of the pandemic (2020), compared to baseline in 2019. Study Design and Analysis: Cross sectional study. Dataset: Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network electronic medical record data from sites in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. Population Studied: Patients that met the case definition criteria for an RTI or a Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) in 2019, and in 2020. Outcome measures: We examined oral antibiotic prescribing for patients who were identified as having a primary care visit for RTI. The same analysis was repeated for urinary tract infection (UTI) as a tracer condition. The antibiotic use considered avoidable for RTI was defined by Choosing Wisely Canada. Results: A total of 1,692,876 patients with a valid birth year and sex and at least one visit to primary care in 2019 and 2020 were included. Patient visits for RTI decreased from 2.3% in 2019 to 1.6% in 2020 (p<.0001), as did patient visits for UTI (1.1% vs 0.7%, p<.0001). In 2019, 28.0% of patients visits for RTI were prescribed an antibiotic, and this proportion decreased significantly to 20.6% in 2020 (<.0001). The drop in antibiotic prescriptions for RTI was driven by a decrease in prescribing for common cold (13.6% vs. 11.3%, <.0001) and for acute bronchitis/asthma (15.2% vs. 7.3%, p<.0001). In comparison, antibiotic prescribing for visits related to UTI increased marginally between 2019 and 2020 (71.6% vs. 72.3%, p=0.007). Conclusions: A significant decrease in antibiotic prescribing for RTI across primary care was observed during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, likely related to the changes in epidemiology and care delivery models in primary care. CPCSSN can provide pan-Canadian surveillance of antibiotic prescribing practices in primary care that can be used for provider feedback and quality improvement.

Inappropriate use of clinical practices in Canada: a systematic review

Background:

Inappropriate health care leads to negative patient experiences, poor health outcomes and inefficient use of resources. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of inappropriately used clinical practices in Canada.

Methods:

We searched multiple bibliometric databases and grey literature to identify inappropriately used clinical practices in Canada between 2007 and 2021. Two team members independently screened citations, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Findings were synthesized in 2 categories: diagnostics and therapeutics. We reported ranges of proportions of inappropriate use for all practices. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs), based on the percentage of patients not receiving recommended practices (underuse) or receiving practices not recommended (overuse), were calculated. All statistics are at the study summary level.

Results:

We included 174 studies, representing 228 clinical practices and 28 900 762 patients. The median proportion of inappropriate care, as assessed in the studies, was 30.0% (IQR 12.0%–56.6%). Underuse (median 43.9%, IQR 23.8%–66.3%) was more frequent than overuse (median 13.6%, IQR 3.2%–30.7%). The most frequently investigated diagnostics were glycated hemoglobin (underused, range 18.0%–85.7%, n = 9) and thyroid-stimulating hormone (overused, range 3.0%–35.1%, n = 5). The most frequently investigated therapeutics were statin medications (underused, range 18.5%–71.0%, n = 6) and potentially inappropriate medications (overused, range 13.5%–97.3%, n = 9).

Interpretation:

We have provided a summary of inappropriately used clinical practices in Canadian health care systems. Our findings can be used to support health care professionals and quality agencies to improve patient care and safety in Canada.

Reframing Resource Stewardship and Sustainability as Professionalism: What Can Efforts for a Net-Zero Health System Learn from Choosing Wisely Campaigns?

Miller and Xie (2020) issue a compelling and wide-ranging call to action for how healthcare systems, leaders and decision makers can and should mobilize to address the climate crisis. Issues of sustainability and the climate crisis are complex, wicked problems with no simple solutions. Sustainability considerations and the imperative to use healthcare system resources wisely are a motivator of the Choosing Wisely Canada campaign. These considerations are increasingly urgent in the context of fiscal and resource deficits due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The experience of Choosing Wisely campaigns can offer potential strategies for driving increased awareness and action from healthcare stakeholders on the climate crisis. This commentary explores some of the factors that have contributed to the spread of Choosing Wisely campaigns and the levers that have fostered campaign uptake. It will also consider the challenges faced by, and lessons learned, from Choosing Wisely campaigns, and how these could inform healthcare systems and individual clinicians in increasing awareness and taking leadership on the climate crisis.

Association of Low-Value Testing With Subsequent Health Care Use and Clinical Outcomes Among Low-risk Primary Care Outpatients Undergoing an Annual Health Examination

IMPORTANCE

The association of low-value testing with downstream care and clinical outcomes among primary care outpatients is unknown to date.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of low-value testing with subsequent care among low-risk primary care outpatients undergoing an annual health examination (AHE).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This population-based retrospective cohort study used administrative health care claims from Ontario, Canada, for primary care outpatients undergoing an AHE between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2016, to identify individuals who could be placed into one (or more) of the following 3 cohorts: adult patients (18 years or older) at low risk for cardiovascular and pulmonary disease, adult patients at low risk for cardiovascular disease, and female patients (aged 13-20 years or older than 69 years) at low risk for cervical cancer. The dates of analysis were June 3 to September 12, 2019.

EXPOSURES

Low-value screening tests were defined per cohort as (1) a chest radiograph within 7 days, (2) an electrocardiogram (ECG) within 30 days, or (3) a Papanicolaou test within 7 days after an AHE.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Subsequent specialist visits, diagnostic tests, and procedures within 90 days after a low-value test (if the patient had a chest radiograph, ECG, or Papanicolaou test) or end of the exposure observation window (if not tested).

RESULTS

Included in the chest radiograph, ECG, and Papanicolaou test cohorts of propensity score-matched pairs were 43 532 patients (mean [SD] age, 47.5 [14.4] years; 38.5% female), 245 686 patients (mean [SD] age, 49.9 [13.7] years; 51.1% female), and 29 194 patients (mean [SD] age, 45.5 [27.1] years; 100% female), respectively. At 90 days, chest radiographs in low-risk patients were associated with an additional 0.87 (95% CI, 0.69-1.05) and 1.96 (95% CI, 1.71-2.22) patients having an outpatient pulmonology visit or an abdominal or thoracic computed tomography scan per 100 patients, respectively, and ECGs in low-risk patients were associated with an additional 1.92 (95% CI, 1.82-2.02), 5.49 (95% CI, 5.33-5.65), and 4.46 (95% CI, 4.31-4.61) patients having an outpatient cardiologist visit, a transthoracic echocardiogram, or a cardiac stress test per 100 patients, respectively. At 180 days, Papanicolaou testing in low-risk patients was associated with an additional 1.31 (95% CI, 0.84-1.78), 52.8 (95% CI, 51.9-53.6), and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.66-1.01) patients having an outpatient gynecology visit, a follow-up Papanicolaou test, or colposcopy per 100 patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Observed associations in this population-based cohort study suggest that testing in low-risk patients as part of an AHE increases the likelihood of subsequent specialist visits, diagnostic tests, and procedures.

De-implementing wisely: developing the evidence base to reduce low-value care

Choosing Wisely (CW) campaigns globally have focused attention on the need to reduce low-value care, which can represent up to 30% of the costs of healthcare. Despite early enthusiasm for the CW initiative, few large-scale changes in rates of low-value care have been reported since the launch of these campaigns. Recent commentaries suggest that the focus of the campaign should be on implementation of evidence-based strategies to effectively reduce low-value care. This paper describes the Choosing Wisely De-Implementation Framework (CWDIF), a novel framework that builds on previous work in the field of implementation science and proposes a comprehensive approach to systematically reduce low-value care in both hospital and community settings and advance the science of de-implementation.The CWDIF consists of five phases: Phase 0, identification of potential areas of low-value healthcare; Phase 1, identification of local priorities for implementation of CW recommendations; Phase 2, identification of barriers to implementing CW recommendations and potential interventions to overcome these; Phase 3, rigorous evaluations of CW implementation programmes; Phase 4, spread of effective CW implementation programmes. We provide a worked example of applying the CWDIF to develop and evaluate an implementation programme to reduce unnecessary preoperative testing in healthy patients undergoing low-risk surgeries and to further develop the evidence base to reduce low-value care.

Measuring the frequency and variation of unnecessary care across Canada

BACKGROUND

Through the Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) campaign, national medical specialty societies have released hundreds of recommendations against health care services that are unnecessary, i.e. present little to no benefit or cause avoidable harm. Despite growing interest in unnecessary care both within Canada and internationally, prior research has typically avoided taking a national or even multi-jurisdictional approach in measuring the extent of the issue. This study estimates use of three unnecessary services identified by CWC recommendations across multiple Canadian jurisdictions.

METHODS

Two retrospective cohort studies were conducted using administrative health care data collected between fiscal years 2011/12 and 2012/13 to respectively quantify use of 1) diagnostic imaging (spinal X-ray, CT or MRI) among Albertan patients following a visit for lower back pain and 2) cardiac tests (electrocardiogram, chest X-ray, stress test, or transthoracic echocardiogram) prior to low-risk surgical procedures in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario. A cross-sectional study of the 2012 Canadian Community Health Survey was also conducted to estimate 3) the proportion of females aged 40-49 that reported having a routine mammogram in the past two years.

RESULTS

Use of unnecessary care was relatively frequent across all three services and jurisdiction measured: 30.7% of Albertan patients had diagnostic imaging within six months of their initial visit for lower back pain; a cardiac test preceded 17.9 to 35.5% of low-risk surgical procedures across Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario; and 22.2% of Canadian women aged 40-49 at average-risk for breast cancer reported having a routine screening mammogram in the past two years.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of potentially unnecessary care appears to be common in Canada. This investigation provides methodology to facilitate future measurement efforts that may incorporate additional jurisdictions and/or unnecessary services.

Choosing Wisely campaigns globally: A shared approach to tackling the problem of overuse in healthcare

Choosing Wisely, a campaign which launched in the United States in 2012, has now spread to over 20 countries around the world. Choosing Wisely campaigns share a core set of principles, which inform how campaigns operate and engage with physicians, clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders. This article will address the origins and motivation of Choosing Wisely campaigns, and what factors have supported their spread. It will also discuss how leaders of Choosing Wisely campaigns are collaborating on shared priorities.

Physician Characteristics Associated With Ordering 4 Low-Value Screening Tests in Primary Care

IMPORTANCE

Efforts to reduce low-value tests and treatments in primary care are often ineffective. These efforts typically target physicians broadly, most of whom order low-value care infrequently.

OBJECTIVES

To measure physician-level use rates of 4 low-value screening tests in primary care to investigate the presence and characteristics of primary care physicians who frequently order low-value care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative health care claims collected between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2016, in Ontario, Canada. This study measured use of 4 low-value screening tests-repeated dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, electrocardiograms (ECGs), Papanicolaou (Pap) tests, and chest radiographs (CXRs)-among low-risk outpatients rostered to a common cohort of primary care physicians.

EXPOSURES

Physician sex, years since medical school graduation, and primary care model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

This study measured the number of tests to which a given physician ranked in the top quintile by ordering rate. The resulting cross-test score (range, 0-4) reflects a physician's propensity to order low-value care across screening tests. Physicians were then dichotomized into infrequent or isolated frequent users (score, 0 or 1, respectively) or generalized frequent users for 2 or more tests (score, ≥2).

RESULTS

The final sample consisted of 2394 primary care physicians (mean [SD] age, 51.3 [10.0] years; 50.2% female), who were predominantly Canadian medical school graduates (1701 [71.1%]), far removed from medical school graduation (median, 25.3 years; interquartile range, 17.3-32.3 years), and reimbursed via fee-for-service in a family health group (1130 [47.2%]). They ordered 302 509 low-value screening tests (74 167 DXA scans, 179 855 ECGs, 19 906 Pap tests, and 28 581 CXRs) after 3 428 557 ordering opportunities. Within the cohort, generalized frequent users represented 18.4% (441 of 2394) of physicians but ordered 39.2% (118 665 of 302 509) of all low-value screening tests. Physicians who were male (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.01-1.64), further removed from medical school graduation (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04), or in an enhanced fee-for-service payment model (family health group) vs a capitated payment model (family health team) (odds ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.42-2.94) had increased odds of being generalized frequent users.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study identified a group of primary care physicians who frequently ordered low-value screening tests. Tailoring future interventions to these generalized frequent users might be an effective approach to reducing low-value care.

Routine use of chest x-ray for low-risk patients undergoing a periodic health examination: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Many evidence-based recommendations advocate against the use of routine chest x-rays for asymptomatic, low-risk outpatients; however, it is unclear how regularly chest x-rays are ordered in primary care. Our study aims to describe the frequency of, and variation in, routine chest x-ray use in low-risk outpatients among primary care physicians.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, Ontario residents aged 18 years and older with a periodic health examination (PHE) between Apr. 1, 2010, and Mar. 31, 2015, were identified via administrative claims data. Patients with a recent history (last 3 years) of any of the following were excluded: cardiac or pulmonary disease, high-risk comorbidity (e.g., diabetes), consultations/visits or procedures involving cardiac or pulmonary specialists, cancer and severe chest trauma. The primary outcome, a routine chest x-ray, was defined as at least 1 chest x-ray claim within 7 days after a PHE.

RESULTS

While a routine chest x-ray followed only 2.42% of 2 847 508 PHEs, one-quarter of family physicians (499/2031) ordered chest x-rays for more than 5.0% of their PHEs (interquartile range 1.5%-5.0%) and accounted for 62.9% of all tests observed. Routine chest x-ray use declined by 2.0% per quarter (adjusted rate ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-0.98). Older age (45-64 yr v. 18-44 yr, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.82, 95% CI 1.78-1.86; ≥ 65 yr v. 18-44 yr, adjusted OR 2.48, 95% CI 2.39-2.58) and male sex of the patient (OR 2.19, 95% CI 2.14-2.24) and male sex of the provider (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.51-1.59) were significantly associated with increased odds of a routine chest x-ray being ordered.

INTERPRETATION

It is relatively uncommon for a chest x-ray to be ordered as part of a PHE in Ontario; however, the substantial variation observed among physicians suggests potential for interventions targeted at the most frequent users.

'Choosing Wisely' culture among Brazilian cardiologists

Objective

(i) To describe how aligned the 'Choosing Wisely' concept is with the medical culture among Brazilian cardiologists and (ii) to identify predictors for physicians' preference for avoiding wasteful care.

Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting

Brazilian Society of Cardiology.

Participants

Cardiologists who agree to fill a web questionary.

Intervention

A task force of 12 Brazilian cardiologists prepared a list of 13 'do not do' recommendations, which were made available on the Brazilian Society of Cardiology website for affiliates to assign a supported score of 1 to 10 to each recommendation.

Main Outcome Measurement

Score average for supporting recommendations.

Results

Of 14 579 Brazilian cardiologists, 621 (4.3%) answered the questionnaire. The top recommendation was 'do not perform routine percutaneous coronary intervention in asymptomatic individuals' (mean score = 8.0 ± 2.9) while the one with the lowest support was 'do not use an intra-aortic balloon pump in infarction with cardiogenic shock' (5.8 ± 3.2). None of the 13 recommendations presented a mean grade >9 (strong support); 7 recommendations averaged 7-8 (moderate support) followed by 6 recommendations with an average of 5-7 (modest support). Multivariate analysis independently identified predictors of the score attributed to the top recommendation; being an interventionist and time since graduation were both negatively associated with support.

Conclusions

(i) The support of Brazilian cardiologists for the 'Choosing Wisely' concept is modest to moderate, and (ii) older generations and enthusiasm towards the procedure one performs may be factors against the 'Choosing Wisely' philosophy.

Choosing Wisely Canada Students and Trainees Advocating for Resource Stewardship (STARS) campaign: a descriptive evaluation

BACKGROUND

Resource stewardship is being increasingly recognized as an essential competency for physicians, but medical schools are just beginning to integrate this into education. We describe the evaluation of Choosing Wisely Canada's Students and Trainees Advocating for Resource Stewardship (STARS) campaign, a student-led campaign to advance resource stewardship education in medical schools across Canada.

METHODS

We evaluated the campaign 6 months after its launch, in November 2015. STARS students were administered a telephone survey eliciting a description of the initiatives that they had implemented or planned to implement at their schools to promote resource stewardship, and exploring their perceptions of facilitators of and barriers to successful implementation of their initiatives. We used a mixed-methods approach to analyze and summarize the data.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven (82%) of the 33 eligible students representing all 17 medical schools responded. In 14 schools (82%), students led various local activities (e.g., interest groups, campaign weeks) to raise awareness about resource stewardship among medical students and faculty. Students contributed to curriculum change (both planned and implemented) at 10 schools (59%). Thematic analysis revealed key program characteristics that facilitated success (e.g., pan-Canadian student network, local faculty champion) as well as barriers to implementing change (e.g., complex processes to change curriculum, hierarchical nature of medical school).

INTERPRETATION

This student-led campaign, with support from local faculty and Choosing Wisely Canada staff, led to awareness-building activities and early curricula change at medical schools across Canada. Future plans will build on the initial momentum created by the STARS campaign to sustain and spread local initiatives.

Electrocardiograms in Low-Risk Patients Undergoing an Annual Health Examination

Importance

Clinical guidelines advise against routine electrocardiograms (ECG) in low-risk, asymptomatic patients, but the frequency and impact of such ECGs are unknown.

Objective

To assess the frequency of ECGs following an annual health examination (AHE) with a primary care physician among patients with no known cardiac conditions or risk factors, to explore factors predictive of receiving an ECG in this clinical scenario, and to compare downstream cardiac testing and clinical outcomes in low-risk patients who did and did not receive an ECG after their AHE.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative health care databases from Ontario, Canada, between 2010/2011 and 2014/2015 to identify low-risk primary care patients and to assess the subsequent outcomes of interest in this time frame. All patients 18 years or older who had no prior cardiac medical history or risk factors who received an AHE.

Exposures

Receipt of an ECG within 30 days of an AHE.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcome was receipt of downstream cardiac testing or consultation with a cardiologist. Secondary outcomes were death, hospitalization, and revascularization at 12 months.

Results

A total of 3 629 859 adult patients had at least 1 AHE between fiscal years 2010/2011 and 2014/2015. Of these patients, 21.5% had an ECG within 30 days after an AHE. The proportion of patients receiving an ECG after an AHE varied from 1.8% to 76.1% among 679 primary care practices (coefficient of quartile dispersion [CQD], 0.50) and from 1.1% to 94.9% among 8036 primary care physicians (CQD, 0.54). Patients who had an ECG were significantly more likely to receive additional cardiac tests, visits, or procedures than those who did not (odds ratio [OR], 5.14; 95% CI, 5.07-5.21; P < .001). The rates of death (0.19% vs 0.16%), cardiac-related hospitalizations (0.46% vs 0.12%), and coronary revascularizations (0.20% vs 0.04%) were low in both the ECG and non-ECG cohorts.

Conclusions and Relevance

Despite recommendations to the contrary, ECG testing after an AHE is relatively common, with significant variation among primary care physicians. Routine ECG testing seems to increase risk for a subsequent cardiology testing and consultation cascade, even though the overall cardiac event rate in both groups was very low.

Building Bridges to Integrate Care (BRIDGES): Incubating Health Service Innovation across the Continuum of Care for Patients with Multiple Chronic Conditions

Integrating care for people with complex needs is challenging. Indeed, evidence of solutions is mixed, and therefore, well-designed, shared evaluation approaches are needed to create cumulative learning. The Toronto-based Building Bridges to Integrate Care (BRIDGES) collaborative provided resources to refine and test nine new models linking primary, hospital and community care. It used mixed methods, a cross-project meta-evaluation and shared outcome measures. Given the range of skills required to develop effective interventions, a novel incubator was used to test and spread opportunities for system integration that included operational expertise and support for evaluation and process improvement.

Learning Through Experience: Influence of Formal and Informal Training on Medical Error Disclosure Skills in Residents

BACKGROUND

Residents' attitudes toward error disclosure have improved over time. It is unclear whether this has been accompanied by improvements in disclosure skills.

OBJECTIVE

To measure the disclosure skills of internal medicine (IM), paediatrics, and orthopaedic surgery residents, and to explore resident perceptions of formal versus informal training in preparing them for disclosure in real-world practice.

METHODS

We assessed residents' error disclosure skills using a structured role play with a standardized patient in 2012-2013. We compared disclosure skills across programs using analysis of variance. We conducted a multiple linear regression, including data from a historical cohort of IM residents from 2005, to investigate the influence of predictor variables on performance: training program, cohort year, and prior disclosure training and experience. We conducted a qualitative descriptive analysis of data from semistructured interviews with residents to explore resident perceptions of formal versus informal disclosure training.

RESULTS

In a comparison of disclosure skills for 49 residents, there was no difference in overall performance across specialties (4.1 to 4.4 of 5, P = .19). In regression analysis, only the current cohort was significantly associated with skill: current residents performed better than a historical cohort of 42 IM residents (P < .001). Qualitative analysis identified the importance of both formal (workshops, morbidity and mortality rounds) and informal (role modeling, debriefing) activities in preparation for disclosure in real-world practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Residents across specialties have similar skills in disclosure of errors. Residents identified role modeling and a strong local patient safety culture as key facilitators for disclosure.

Frequency of and variation in low-value care in primary care: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Low-value care, defined as care with a lack of benefit, can lead to higher health care costs, inconvenience to patients and, in some cases, harm to patients. The objectives of this study are to conduct exploratory analyses to understand how frequently selected low-value tests are ordered, to assess the degree of variation in ordering that exists across regions and practices, and to identify services that may warrant further investigation and targeted interventions.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative health care databases from Ontario to identify rates of use of the following low-value services between fiscal years 2008/09 and 2012/13: computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after a diagnosis of low back pain, Papanicolaou testing in women less than 21 years of age or older than 69 years of age and repeated dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scanning within 2 years of an index scan. Regional and practice-level rates were calculated. Bivariate analyses were conducted to explore associations between patient factors and repeat DEXA scans.

RESULTS

Repeated DEXA scans were the most common service (21.0%), whereas cervical cancer screening among women less than 21 years of age or older than 69 years of age (8.0%) and CT or MRI imaging for low back pain (4.5%) were less common. There was substantial variation across practices with rates of repeated DEXA scans, ranging from 4.0% to 54.9%, and cervical cancer screening, ranging from 0.9% to 35.2%. Patients with a high-risk index DEXA were more likely to receive a repeat scan (28.1%) than those with a baseline (8.9%) or low-risk (8.1%) scan.

INTERPRETATION

There is significant, practice-level variation in the frequency of low-value testing for DEXA scans, back imaging and cervical cancer screening. There is a particular need for interventions that aim to reduce unnecessary DEXA scans.

Choosing Wisely for Medical Education: Six Things Medical Students and Trainees Should Question

PROBLEM

Physician behaviors that promote overuse of health care resources develop early in training, and the medical education environment helps foster such behaviors. The authors describe the development of a Choosing Wisely list for medical students aimed at helping to curb overuse.

APPROACH

The list was developed in 2015 by Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) in partnership with the Canadian Federation of Medical Students and the Fédération médicale étudiante du Québec, which together represent all medical students in Canada. CWC convened a student-led taskforce to develop recommendations targeting medical student behaviors with respect to resource stewardship practices. Students at all 17 Canadian medical schools were consulted via an online questionnaire to solicit feedback on a list of 10 candidate recommendations. The taskforce used this student feedback in finalizing the list.

OUTCOMES

The final list of "Six Things That Medical Students and Trainees Should Question" highlights both behaviors students should avoid (e.g., "Don't suggest ordering the most invasive test before considering other less invasive options") and behaviors related to aspects of medical training that may promote overuse, such as the hierarchical nature of clinical supervision (e.g., "Don't hesitate to ask for clarification on tests, treatments, or procedures that you believe may be ordered inappropriately"). Based on student requests for illustrative examples, clinical vignettes were developed.

NEXT STEPS

This list highlights medical student behaviors and aspects of the academic environment that drive overuse. It is also relevant to faculty, whose behaviors and supervision practices influence trainees.

Women in Academic Medicine Leadership: Has Anything Changed in 25 Years?

Over the past 25 years, the number of women graduating from medical schools in the United States and Canada has increased dramatically to the point where roughly equal numbers of men and women are graduating each year. Despite this growth, women continue to face challenges in moving into academic leadership positions. In this Commentary, the authors share lessons learned from their own careers relevant to women's careers in academic medicine, including aspects of leadership, recruitment, editorship, promotion, and work-life balance. They provide brief synopses of current literature on the personal and social forces that affect women's participation in academic leadership roles. They are persuaded that a deeper understanding of these realities can help create an environment in academic medicine that is generally more supportive of women's participation, and that specifically encourages women in medicine to take on academic leadership positions.

Retrospective Versus Actual Pre-Course Self-Assessments

Self-assessments are frequently used to evaluate the effectiveness of medical education programs. The change in learners' self-ratings preto post-course is attributed to the educational intervention. However, participants may also change their understanding of the dimension being measured and hence, adjust their criteria for self-rating (response shift). This study was designed to compare a conventional prelpost course evaluation design with a retrospective pre/post method used to minimize the effect of the response shift. Participants attending a course in 1987 or 1988 designed to improve interviewing and teaching skills completed a faculty self-rating form (a) one month before the course; (b) after the course, assessing their pre-course skill level (retrospective pre-course); and (c) after the course, assessing their present skill level (post-course). Retrospective pre-course ratings were significantly lower than actual precourse ratings in two out of four factors empirically derived from the assessment instrument in 1987 and three of four in 1988. Greater differences preto post-course were found using the retrospective as opposed to the actual pre-course self-ratings. Our findings indicate that the collection of retrospective pre-course and post-course self-ratings at a single point in time demonstrates greater differences than the conventional pre/post evaluation method. Use of the retrospective precourse method is efficient and may be a more accurate evaluation method than the conventional prelpost evaluation.