Abstract

BackgroundIt is unknown to what extent Choosing Wisely recommendations about income-generating treatments apply to members of the society generating the recommendations.The primary aim of this study is to determine the proportion of Choosing Wisely recommendations targeting income-generating treatments, and whether recommendations from professional societies on income-generating treatments are more likely to target members or non-members. The secondary aim is to determine the prevalence of qualified statements, and whether qualified statements are more likely to appear in recommendations targeting income-generating or non-income-generating treatments that apply to members.MethodsWe performed a content analysis of all Choosing Wisely recommendations, with data extracted from Choosing Wisely websites. Two researchers coded recommendations as test or treatment-based, for or against a procedure, containing qualified statements, income-generating and applying to members. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or consultation with a third researcher. A Chi-squared test evaluated whether society recommendations on income-generating treatments were more likely to target members or non-members; and whether qualified statements were more likely to appear in recommendations targeting income-generating or non-income-generating treatments that apply to members.ResultsWe found 1293 Choosing Wisely recommendations (48.3% tests and 48.6% treatments). Ninety-eight treatment recommendations targeted income-generating treatments (17.8%), and recommendations on income-generating treatments were less likely to target members compared to non-members (15.6% vs. 40.4%, p < 0.001). Nearly half of all recommendations were qualified (41.9%), with a similar proportion of recommendations targeting income-generating and non-income-generating treatments that apply to members containing qualified statements (49.4% vs. 42.0%, p = 0.23).ConclusionsMany societies provide Choosing Wisely recommendations that minimise impact on their own members. Only 20% of treatment recommendations target income-generating treatments, and of these recommendations mostly target non-members. Many recommendations are also qualified. Increasing the number of recommendations from societies that are unqualified and target member clinicians responsible for de-implementation of low-value and costly treatments should be a priority.

Highlights

  • It is unknown to what extent Choosing Wisely recommendations about income-generating treatments apply to members of the society generating the recommendations

  • The secondary aim is to determine the prevalence of qualified statements, and whether qualified statements are more likely to appear in recommendations targeting income-generating or non-income-generating treatments that apply to members

  • We hypothesise that society recommendations on income-generating treatments are less likely to target members compared to non-members, and that qualified statements are more likely to appear in recommendations targeting income-generating treatments that apply to members

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is unknown to what extent Choosing Wisely recommendations about income-generating treatments apply to members of the society generating the recommendations. The primary aim of this study is to determine the proportion of Choosing Wisely recommendations targeting income-generating treatments, and whether recommendations from professional societies on income-generating treatments are more likely to target members or non-members. Choosing Wisely is a major public awareness campaign that aims to reduce low-value care through increasing discussions between patients and clinicians about the inappropriate use of medical tests and treatments [1]. In an effort to reduce low-value care, professional societies from a variety of health disciplines (including surgery, medicine, diagnostics and allied health) have published Choosing Wisely lists [1]. There are over 1000 Choosing Wisely recommendations published worldwide but there is yet to be an evaluation of their content

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call