Low-value Service Research Articles

Use and Cost of Low-Value Services Among Veterans Dually Enrolled in VA and Medicare.

Over half of veterans enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) are also enrolled in Medicare, potentially increasing their opportunity to receive low-value health services within and outside VA. To characterize the use and cost of low-value services delivered to dually enrolled veterans from VA and Medicare. Retrospective cross-sectional. Veterans enrolled in VA and fee-for-service Medicare (FY 2017-2018). We used VA and Medicare administrative data to identify 29 low-value services across 6 established domains: cancer screening, diagnostic/preventive testing, preoperative testing, imaging, cardiovascular testing, and surgery. We determined the count of low-value services per 100 veterans delivered in VA and Medicare in FY 2018 overall, by domain, and by individual service. We applied standardized estimates to determine each service's cost. Among 1.6 million dually enrolled veterans, the mean age was 73, 97% were men, and 77% were non-Hispanic White. Overall, 63.2 low-value services per 100 veterans were delivered, affecting 32% of veterans; 22.9 services per 100 veterans were delivered in VA and 40.3 services per 100 veterans were delivered in Medicare. The total cost was $226.3 million (M), of which $62.6M was spent in VA and $163.7M in Medicare. The most common low-value service was prostate-specific antigen testing at 17.3 per 100 veterans (VA 55.9%, Medicare 44.1%). The costliest low-value service was percutaneous coronary intervention (VA $10.1M, Medicare $32.8M). Nearly 1 in 3 dually enrolled veterans received a low-value service in FY18, with twice as many low-value services delivered in Medicare vs VA. Interventions to reduce low-value services for veterans should consider their substantial use of such services in Medicare.

Care cascades following low-value cervical cancer screening in dually enrolled Veterans.

Veterans dually enrolled in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) and Medicare commonly experience downstream services as part of a care cascade after an initial low-value service. Our objective was to characterize the frequency and cost of low-value cervical cancer screening and subsequent care cascades among Veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare. This retrospective cohort study used VA and Medicare administrative data from fiscal years 2015 to 2019. The study cohort was comprised of female Veterans aged >65 years and at low risk of cervical cancer who were dually enrolled in VA and Medicare. Within this cohort, we compared differences in the rates and costs of cascade services related to low-value cervical cancer screening for Veterans who received and did not receive screening in FY2018, adjusting for baseline patient- and facility-level covariates using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Among 20,972 cohort-eligible Veterans, 494 (2.4%) underwent low-value cervical cancer screening with 301 (60.9%) initial screens occurring in VA and 193 (39%) occurring in Medicare. Veterans who were screened experienced an additional 26.7 (95% CI, 16.4-37.0) cascade services per 100 Veterans compared to those who were not screened, contributing to $2919.4 (95% CI, -265 to 6104.7) per 100 Veterans in excess costs. Care cascades consisted predominantly of subsequent cervical cancer screening procedures and related outpatient visits with low rates of invasive procedures and occurred in both VA and Medicare. Veterans dually enrolled in VA and Medicare commonly receive related downstream tests and visits as part of care cascades following low-value cervical cancer screening. Our findings demonstrate that to fully capture the extent to which individuals are subject to low-value care, it is important to examine downstream care stemming from initial low-value services across all systems from which individuals receive care.

Using Behavioral Economics to Reduce Low-Value Care Among Older Adults

Use of low-value care is common among older adults. It is unclear how to best engage clinicians and older patients to decrease use of low-value services. To test whether the Committing to Choose Wisely behavioral economic intervention could engage primary care clinicians and older patients to reduce low-value care. Stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial conducted at 8 primary care clinics of an academic health system and a private group practice between December 12, 2017, and September 4, 2019. Participants were primary care clinicians and older adult patients who had diabetes, insomnia, or anxiety or were eligible for prostate cancer screening. Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to November 2023. Clinicians were invited to commit in writing to Choosing Wisely recommendations for older patients to avoid use of hypoglycemic medications to achieve tight glycemic control, sedative-hypnotic medications for insomnia or anxiety, and prostate-specific antigen tests to screen for prostate cancer. Committed clinicians had their photographs displayed on clinic posters and received weekly emails with alternatives to these low-value services. Educational handouts were mailed to applicable patients before scheduled visits and available at the point of care. Patient-months with a low-value service across conditions (primary outcome) and separately for each condition (secondary outcomes). For patients with diabetes, or insomnia or anxiety, secondary outcomes were patient-months in which targeted medications were decreased or stopped (ie, deintensified). The study included 81 primary care clinicians and 8030 older adult patients (mean [SD] age, 75.1 [7.2] years; 4076 men [50.8%] and 3954 women [49.2%]). Across conditions, a low-value service was used in 7627 of the 37 116 control patient-months (20.5%) and 7416 of the 46 381 intervention patient-months (16.0%) (adjusted odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.97). For each individual condition, there were no significant differences between the control and intervention periods in the odds of patient-months with a low-value service. The intervention increased the odds of deintensification of hypoglycemic medications for diabetes (adjusted odds ratio, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.06-3.24) but not sedative-hypnotic medications for insomnia or anxiety. In this stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial, the Committing to Choose Wisely behavioral economic intervention reduced low-value care across 3 common clinical situations and increased deintensification of hypoglycemic medications for diabetes. Use of scalable interventions that nudge patients and clinicians to achieve greater value while preserving autonomy in decision-making should be explored more broadly. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03411525.

Evaluating the accessibility and value of U.S. ambulatory care among Medicaid expansion states and non-expansion states, 2012–2015

BackgroundWhile the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion improved healthcare coverage and access for millions of uninsured Americans, less is known about its effects on the overall accessibility and quality of care across all payers. Rapid volume increases of newly enrolled Medicaid patients might have unintentionally strained accessibility or quality of care. We assessed changes in physician office visits and high- and low-value care associated with Medicaid expansion across all payers.MethodsPrespecified, quasi-experimental, difference-in-differences analysis pre and post Medicaid expansion (2012–2015) in 8 states that did and 5 that did not choose to expand Medicaid. Physician office visits sampled from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, standardized with U.S. Census population estimates. Outcomes included visit rates per state population and rates of high or low-value service composites of 10 high-value measures and 7 low-value care measures respectively, stratified by year and insurance.ResultsWe identified approximately 143 million adults utilizing 1.9 billion visits (mean age 56; 60% female) during 2012–2015. Medicaid visits increased in expansion states post-expansion compared to non-expansion states by 16.2 per 100 adults (p = 0.031 95% CI 1.5–31.0). New Medicaid visits increased by 3.1 per 100 adults (95% CI 0.9–5.3, p = 0.007). No changes were observed in Medicare or commercially-insured visit rates. High or low-value care did not change for any insurance type, except high-value care during new Medicaid visits, which increased by 4.3 services per 100 adults (95% CI 1.1–7.5, p = 0.009).ConclusionsFollowing Medicaid expansion, the U.S. healthcare system increased access to care and use of high-value services for millions of Medicaid enrollees, without observable reductions in access or quality for those enrolled in other insurance types. Provision of low-value care continued at similar rates post-expansion, informing future federal policies designed to improve the value of care.

Re: The Prevalence of Low-Value Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care Clinics: A Study Using the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey

To the Editor: Gillette et al analyze how PSA screening for age 70 and over, a low-value service, is being implemented in the United States.[1][1] For PSA screening, the United States Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) assigns grade C to those aged 55 to 70 and grade D to all other age groups.

Variation in Low-Value Service Use Across Veterans Affairs Facilities.

It is unclear whether extensive variation in the use of low-value services exists even within a national integrated delivery system like the Veterans Health Administration (VA). To quantify variation in the use of low-value services across VA facilities and examine associations between facility characteristics and low-value service use. In this retrospective cross-sectional study of VA administrative data, we constructed facility-level rates of low-value service use as the mean count of 29 low-value services per 100 Veterans per year. Adjusted rates were calculated via ordinary least squares regression including covariates for Veteran sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. We quantified the association between adjusted facility-level rates and facility geographic/operational characteristics. 5,242,301 patients across 139 VA facilities. Use of 29 low-value services within six domains: cancer screening, diagnostic/preventive testing, preoperative testing, imaging, cardiovascular testing and procedures, and surgery. The mean rate of low-value service use was 20.0 services per 100 patients per year (S.D. 6.1). Rates ranged from 13.9 at the 10th percentile to 27.6 at the 90th percentile (90th/10th percentile ratio 2.0, 95% CI 1.8‒2.3). With adjustment for patient covariates, variation across facilities narrowed (S.D. 5.2, 90th/10th percentile ratio 1.8, 95% CI 1.6‒1.9). Only one facility characteristic was positively associated with low-value service use percent of patients seeing non-VA clinicians via VA Community Care, p < 0.05); none was associated with total low-value service use after adjustment for other facility characteristics. There was extensive variation in low-value service use within categories of facility operational characteristics. Despite extensive variation in the use of low-value services across VA facilities, we observed substantial use of these services across facility operational characteristics and at facilities with lower rates of low-value service use. Thus, system-wide interventions to address low-value services may be more effective than interventions targeted to specific facilities or facility types.

Comparison of Low-Value Care Among Commercial and Medicaid Enrollees.

Low-value healthcare is costly and inefficient and may adversely affect patient outcomes. Despite increases in low-value service use, little is known about how the receipt of low-value care differs across payers. To evaluate differences in the use of low-value care between patients with commercial versus Medicaid coverage. Retrospective observational analysis of the 2017 Rhode Island All-payer Claims Database, estimating the probability of receiving each of 14 low-value services between commercial and Medicaid enrollees, adjusting for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Ensemble machine learning minimized the possibility of model misspecification. Medicaid and commercial enrollees aged 18-64 with continuous coverage and an encounter at which they were at risk of receiving a low-value service. Enrollment in Medicaid or Commercial insurance. Use of one of 14 validated measures of low-value care. Among 110,609 patients, Medicaid enrollees were younger, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to be female than commercial enrollees. Medicaid enrollees had higher rates of use for 7 low-value care measures, and those with commercial coverage had higher rates for 5 measures. Across all measures of low-value care, commercial enrollees received more (risk difference [RD] 6.8 percentage points; CI: 6.6 to 7.0) low-value services than their counterparts with Medicaid. Commercial enrollees were also more likely to receive low-value services typically performed in the emergency room (RD 11.4 percentage points; CI: 10.7 to 12.2) and services that were less expensive (RD 15.3 percentage points; CI 14.6 to 16.0). Differences in the provision of low-value care varied across measures, though average use was slightly higher among commercial than Medicaid enrollees. This difference was more pronounced for less expensive services indicating that financial incentives may not be the sole driver of low-value care.

Use and Cost of Low-Value Health Services Delivered or Paid for by the Veterans Health Administration

Within the Veterans Health Administration (VA), the use and cost of low-value services delivered by VA facilities or increasingly by VA Community Care (VACC) programs have not been comprehensively quantified. To quantify veterans' overall use and cost of low-value services, including VA-delivered care and VA-purchased community care. This cross-sectional study assessed a national population of VA-enrolled veterans. Data on enrollment, sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, and health care services delivered by VA facilities or paid for by the VA through VACC programs were compiled for fiscal year 2018 from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. Data analysis was conducted from April 2020 to January 2022. VA administrative data were applied using an established low-value service metric to quantify the use of 29 potentially low-value tests and procedures delivered in VA facilities and by VACC programs across 6 domains: cancer screening, diagnostic and preventive testing, preoperative testing, imaging, cardiovascular testing and procedures, and other procedures. Sensitive and specific criteria were used to determine the low-value service counts per 100 veterans overall, by domain, and by individual service; count and percentage of each low-value service delivered by each setting; and estimated cost of each service. Among 5.2 million enrolled veterans, the mean (SD) age was 62.5 (16.0) years, 91.7% were male, 68.0% were non-Hispanic White, and 32.3% received any service through VACC. By specific criteria, 19.6 low-value services per 100 veterans were delivered in VA facilities or by VACC programs, involving 13.6% of veterans at a total cost of $205.8 million. Overall, the most frequently delivered low-value service was prostate-specific antigen testing for men aged 75 years or older (5.9 per 100 veterans); this was also the service with the greatest proportion delivered by VA facilities (98.9%). The costliest low-value services were spinal injections for low back pain ($43.9 million; 21.4% of low-value care spending) and percutaneous coronary intervention for stable coronary disease ($36.8 million; 17.9% of spending). This cross-sectional study found that among veterans enrolled in the VA, more than 1 in 10 have received a low-value service from VA facilities or VACC programs, with approximately $200 million in associated costs. Such information on the use and costs of low-value services are essential to guide the VA's efforts to reduce delivery and spending on such care.

Identifying drivers of health care value: a scoping review of the literature

BackgroundAs health care spending reaches unsustainable levels, improving value has become an increasingly important policy priority. Relatively little research has explored factors driving value. As a first step towards filling this gap, we performed a scoping review of the literature to identify potential drivers of health care value.MethodsSearches of PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Policy File, and SCOPUS were conducted between February and March 2020. Empirical studies that explored associations between any range of factors and value (loosely defined as quality or outcomes relative to cost) were eligible for inclusion. We created a template in Microsoft Excel for data extraction and evaluated the quality of included articles using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) quality appraisal tool. Data was synthesized using narrative methods.ResultsTwenty-two studies were included in analyses, of which 20 focused on low value service utilization. Independent variables represented a range of system-, hospital-, provider-, and patient-level characteristics. Although results were mixed, several consistent findings emerged. First, insurance incentive structures may affect value. For example, patients in Accountable Care Organizations had reduced rates of low value care utilization compared to patients in traditionally structured insurance plans. Second, higher intensity of care was associated with higher rates of low value care. Third, culture is likely to contribute to value. This was suggested by findings that recent medical school graduation and allopathic training were associated with reduced low value service utilization and that provider organizations had larger effects on value than did individual physicians.ConclusionsSystem, hospital, provider, and community characteristics influence low value care provision. To improve health care value, strategies aiming to reduce utilization of low value services and promote high value care across various levels will be essential.

Prevalence and Cost of Care Cascades Following Low-Value Preoperative Electrocardiogram and Chest Radiograph Within the Veterans Health Administration.

Low-value care cascades, defined as the receipt of downstream health services potentially related to a low-value service, can result in harm to patients and wasteful healthcare spending, yet have not been characterized within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). To examine if the receipt of low-value preoperative testing is associated with greater utilization and costs of potentially related downstream health services in Veterans undergoing low or intermediate-risk surgery. Retrospective cohort study using VHA administrative data from fiscal years 2017-2018 comparing Veterans who underwent low-value preoperative electrocardiogram (EKG) or chest radiograph (CXR) with those who did not. National cohort of Veterans at low risk of cardiopulmonary disease undergoing low- or intermediate-risk surgery. Difference in rate of receipt and attributed cost of potential cascade services in Veterans who underwent low-value preoperative testing compared to those who did not KEY RESULTS: Among 635,824 Veterans undergoing low-risk procedures, 7.8% underwent preoperative EKG. Veterans who underwent a preoperative EKG experienced an additional 52.4 (95% CI 47.7-57.2) cascade services per 100 Veterans, resulting in $138.28 (95% CI 126.19-150.37) per Veteran in excess costs. Among 739,005 Veterans undergoing low- or intermediate-risk surgery, 3.9% underwent preoperative CXR. These Veterans experienced an additional 61.9 (95% CI 57.8-66.1) cascade services per 100 Veterans, resulting in $152.08 (95% CI $146.66-157.51) per Veteran in excess costs. For both cohorts, care cascades consisted largely of repeat tests, follow-up imaging, and follow-up visits, with low rates invasive services. Among a national cohort of Veterans undergoing low- or intermediate-risk surgeries, low-value care cascades following two routine low-value preoperative tests are common, resulting in greater unnecessary care and costs beyond the initial low-value service. These findings may guide de-implementation policies within VHA and other integrated healthcare systems that target those services whose downstream effects are most prevalent and costly.

Primary versus secondary infrastructure capacity allocation mechanisms

Many infrastructure systems are governed by non-monetary capacity allocation: users submit scheduling requests and an infrastructure manager determines a schedule of utilization given capacity restrictions. Two broad approaches exist to cope with information asymmetry. Under a primary mechanism, the infrastructure manager determines the eventual schedule. Under a secondary mechanism, users can swap their service units following the scheduling adjustments from the infrastructure manager. The secondary mechanism provides flexibility to align the schedule with users’ (private) preferences. However, this paper shows that the secondary mechanism may not result in more efficient outcomes when users are strategic. We develop a multi-stage capacity allocation game in infrastructure systems characterized by multi-period operations, discrete service units and non-atomistic users. We show that the primary mechanism either is incentive compatible, or incentivizes users to voluntarily displace low-value service units from peak to off-peak periods. Such “good gaming” behaviors mitigate system-wide costs. In contrast, the secondary mechanism incentivizes users to request more service units than preferred in peak periods. Such “bad gaming” behaviors increase system-wide costs. The costs from “bad gaming” may outweigh the benefits from secondary swaps: system-wide costs can be lower under the (restricted) primary mechanism than under the (flexible) secondary mechanism.

Does de-implementation of low-value care impact the patient-clinician relationship? A mixed methods study

BackgroundThe importance of reducing low-value care (LVC) is increasingly recognized, but the impact of de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship is not well understood. This mixed-methods study explored the impact of LVC de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship.MethodsAdult primary care patients from a large Virginia health system volunteered to participate in a survey (n = 232) or interview (n = 24). Participants completed the Patient-Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9) after reading a vignette about a clinician declining to provide a low-value service: antibiotics for acute sinusitis (LVC-antibiotics); screening EKG (LVC-EKG); screening vitamin D test (LVC-vitamin D); or an alternate vignette about a high-value service, and imagining that their own primary care clinician had acted in the same manner. A different sample of participants was asked to imagine that their own primary care clinician did not order LVC-antibiotics or LVC-EKG and then respond to semi-structured interview questions. Outcomes data included participant demographics, PDRQ-9 scores (higher score = greater relationship integrity), and content analysis of transcribed interviews. Differences in PDRQ-9 scores were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. Data were integrated for analysis and interpretation.ResultsAlthough participants generally agreed with the vignette narrative (not providing LVC), many demonstrated difficulty comprehending the broad concept of LVC and potential harms. The topic triggered memories of negative experiences with healthcare (typically poor-quality care, not necessarily LVC). The most common recommendation for reducing LVC was for patients to take greater responsibility for their own health. Most participants believed that their relationship with their clinician would not be negatively impacted by denial of LVC because they trusted their clinician’s guidance. Participants emphasized that trusted clinicians are those who listen to them, spend time with them, and offer understandable advice. Some felt that not providing LVC would actually increase their trust in their clinician. Similar PDRQ-9 scores were observed for LVC-antibiotics (38.9), LVC-EKG (37.5), and the alternate vignette (36.4), but LVC-vitamin D was associated with a significantly lower score (31.2) (p < 0.05).ConclusionsIn this vignette-based study, we observed minimal impact of LVC de-implementation on the patient-clinician relationship, although service-specific differences surfaced. Further situation-based research is needed to confirm study findings.

What strategies are used by clinician champions to reduce low-value care?

Background:Clinician champions are front-line clinicians who advocate for and influence practice change in their local context. The strategies they use when leading efforts to reduce the use of low-value care have not been well described. The purpose of this study is to identify and describe strategies used by six clinician champions who led a low-value care initiative in their clinical setting.Methods:Qualitative data collected during an overuse reduction initiative led by clinician champions were used to identify strategies, guided by the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation of strategies. Clinician champions were asked to rank the importance of these activities and indicate which one of the six most important activities they would be willing to discuss in an interview. A 30-min semi-structured interview was conducted with each clinician about the activity they selected and thematically analyzed.Results:Twelve Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies were identified. The top six strategies discussed during interviews were: build a coalition, conduct a local needs assessment, develop a formal implementation blueprint, conduct educational meetings, use facilitation, and develop clinical reminders. Common themes that emerged across all interviews were the use of data to engage clinicians in conversations, including the patient’s perspective in designing the interventions, and investing the time upfront to plan and launch the initiative because of the inherent challenges of relinquishing a service.Conclusions:Clinician champions identified multiple strategies as important when de-implementing a low-value service. Many were used to engage in conversations with stakeholders, including leadership, providers, and patients, to increase buy-in and support, challenge beliefs, promote behavior change, and gather insights about next steps in their effort. Future work is needed to better understand how prepare clinicians for this role and to understand the mechanisms through which these strategies might be effective.

Rates of Low-Value Service in Australian Public Hospitals and the Association With Patient Insurance Status

Low-value services have limited or no benefit to patients. Rates of low-value service in public hospitals may vary by patient insurance status, given that there may be different financial incentives for treatment of privately insured patients. To assess the variation in rates of 5 low-value services performed in Australian public hospitals according to patient funding status (ie, private or public). This retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed New South Wales public hospital data from January 2013 to June 2018. Patients included in the sample were over age 18 years and eligible to receive low-value services based on diagnoses and concomitant procedures. Data analysis was conducted from June to December 2020. Hospital-specific rates of low-value knee arthroscopic debridement, vertebroplasty for osteoporotic spinal fractures, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, oophorectomy with hysterectomy, and laparoscopic uterine nerve ablation for chronic pelvic pain were measured. For each measure, rates within each public hospital were compared by patient funding status descriptively and using multilevel models. A total of 219 862 inpatients were included in analysis from 58 public hospitals across the 5 measures. A total of 38 365 (22 904 [59.7%] women; 12 448 [32.4%] aged 71-80 years) were eligible for knee arthroscopic debridement for osteoarthritis; 2520 (1924 [76.3%] women; 662 [26.3%] aged 71-80 years), vertebroplasty for osteoporotic spinal fractures; 162 285 (82 046 [50.6%] women; 28 255 [17.4%] aged 61-70 years), hyperbaric oxygen therapy; 15 916 (7126 [44.8%] aged 41-50 years), oophorectomy with hysterectomy; and 776 (327 [42.1%] aged 18-30 years), uterine nerve ablation for chronic pelvic pain. Overall rates of low-value services varied considerably between measures, with the lowest rate for hyperbaric oxygen therapy (0.3 procedures per 1000 inpatients [47 of 158 220 eligible inpatients]) and the highest for vertebroplasty (30.8 procedures per 1000 eligible patients [77 of 2501 eligible inpatients]). There was significant variation in rates between hospitals, with a few outlying hospitals (ie, <10), particularly for knee arthroscopy (range from 1.8 to 21.0 per 1000 eligible patients) and vertebroplasty (range from 13.1 to 70.4 per 1000 eligible patients), with higher numerical rates of low-value services among patients with private insurance than for those without. However, there was no association overall between patient insurance status and low-value services. Overall differences in rates among those with and without private insurance by individual procedure type were not statistically significant. There was significant variation in rates of low-value services in public hospitals. While there was no overall association between private insurance and rate of low-value services, private insurance may be associated with low-value service rates in some hospitals. Further exploration of factors specific to local hospitals and practices are needed to reduce this unnecessary care.

Patient, Provider, and Health Care System Characteristics Associated With Overuse in Bronchiolitis.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends against the routine use of β-agonists, corticosteroids, antibiotics, chest radiographs, and viral testing in bronchiolitis, but use of these modalities continues. Our objective for this study was to determine the patient, provider, and health care system characteristics that are associated with receipt of low-value services. Using the Virginia All-Payers Claims Database, we conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of children aged 0 to 23 months with bronchiolitis (code J21, International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision) in 2018. We recorded medications within 3 days and chest radiography or viral testing within 1 day of diagnosis. Using Poisson regression, we identified characteristics associated with each type of overuse. Fifty-six percent of children with bronchiolitis received ≥1 form of overuse, including 9% corticosteroids, 17% antibiotics, 20% β-agonists, 26% respiratory syncytial virus testing, and 18% chest radiographs. Commercially insured children were more likely than publicly insured children to receive a low-value service (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-1.30; P < .0001). Children in emergency settings were more likely to receive a low-value service (aPR 1.24; 95% CI: 1.15-1.33; P < .0001) compared with children in inpatient settings. Children seen in rural locations were more likely than children seen in cities to receive a low-value service (aPR 1.19; 95% CI: 1.11-1.29; P < .0001). Overuse in bronchiolitis remains common and occurs frequently in emergency and outpatient settings and rural locations. Quality improvement initiatives aimed at reducing overuse should include these clinical environments.

Association of Low-Value Care Exposure With Health Care Experience Ratings Among Patient Panels

Patient reviews of health care experiences are increasingly used for public reporting and alternative payment models. Critics have argued that this incentivizes physicians to provide more care, including low-value care, undermining efforts to reduce wasteful practices. To assess associations between rates of low-value service provision to a primary care professional (PCP) patient panel and patients' ratings of their health care experiences. This quality improvement study used Medicare fee-for-service claims from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2014, for a random 20% sample of beneficiaries to identify beneficiaries for whom each of 8 low-value services could be ordered but would be considered unnecessary. The study also used health care experience reports from independently sampled beneficiaries who responded to the 2010-2015 Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Medicare fee-for-service survey. Statistical analysis was performed from January 1, 2019, to December 9, 2020. The main outcomes were health care experience ratings from Medicare beneficiaries who responded to the CAHPS survey from 2 domains, namely "Your Health Care in the Last 6 Months" (overall health care, office wait time, timely access to nonurgent care, and timely access to urgent care) and "Your Personal Doctor" (overall personal physician and a composite score for interactions with personal physician). Beneficiaries in both samples were attributed to the PCP with whom they had the most spending. For each PCP, a composite score of low-value service exposure was constructed using the 20% sample; this score represented the adjusted relative propensity of the PCP patient panel to receive low-value care. The association between low-value service exposure and health care experience ratings reported by the CAHPS respondents in the PCP patient panel was estimated using regression analysis. The final sample had 100 743 PCPs, with a mean of approximately 258 patients per PCP. Only 1 notable association was found; more low-value care exposure was associated with more frequent reports of having to wait more than 15 minutes after the scheduled time of an appointment (a mean of 0.448 points lower CAHPS score on a 10-point scale for PCP patient panels who received the most low-value care vs the least low-value care). Although some other associations were statistically significant, their magnitudes were substantially smaller than those typically considered meaningful in other CAHPS literature and were inconsistent in direction across levels of low-value service exposure. This quality improvement study found that more low-value care exposure for a PCP patient panel was not associated with more favorable patient ratings of their health care experiences.

Assessment of Overuse of Medical Tests and Treatments at US Hospitals Using Medicare Claims

Overuse of health care services exposes patients to unnecessary risk of harm and costs. Distinguishing patterns of overuse among hospitals requires hospital-level measures across multiple services. To describe characteristics of hospitals associated with overuse of health care services in the US. This retrospective cross-sectional analysis used Medicare fee-for-service claims data for beneficiaries older than 65 years from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017, with a lookback of 1 year. Inpatient and outpatient services were included, and services offered at specialty and federal hospitals were excluded. Patients were from hospitals with the capacity (based on a claims filter developed for this study) to perform at least 7 of 12 investigated services. Statistical analyses were performed from July 1, 2020, to December 20, 2020. Outcomes of interest were a composite overuse score ranging from 0 (no overuse of services) to 1 (relatively high overuse of services) and characteristics of hospitals clustered by overuse rates. Twelve published low-value service algorithms were applied to the data to find overuse rates for each hospital, normalized and aggregated to a composite score and then compared across 6 hospital characteristics using multivariable regression. A k-means cluster analysis was used on normalized overuse rates to identify hospital clusters. The primary analysis was performed on 2415 cohort A hospitals (ie, hospitals with capacity for 7 or more services), which included 1 263 592 patients (mean [SD] age, 72.4 [14] years; 678 549 women [53.7%]; 101 017 191 White patients [80.5%]). Head imaging for syncope was the highest-volume low-value service (377 745 patients [29.9%]), followed by coronary artery stenting for stable coronary disease (199 579 [15.8%]). The mean (SD) composite overuse score was 0.40 (0.10) points. Southern hospitals had a higher mean score than midwestern (difference in means: 0.06 [95% CI, 0.05-0.07] points; P < .001), northeast (0.08 [95% CI, 0.06-0.09] points; P < .001), and western hospitals (0.08 [95% CI, 0.07-0.10] points; P < .001). Nonprofit hospitals had a lower adjusted mean score than for-profit hospitals (-0.03 [95% CI, -0.04 to -0.02] points; P < .001). Major teaching hospitals had significantly lower adjusted mean overuse scores vs minor teaching hospitals (difference in means, -0.07 [95% CI, -0.08 to -0.06] points; P < .001) and nonteaching hospitals (-0.10 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.09] points; P < .001). Of the 4 clusters identified, 1 was characterized by its low counts of overuse in all services except for spinal fusion; the majority of major teaching hospitals were in this cluster (164 of 223 major teaching hospitals [73.5%]). This cross-sectional study used a novel measurement of hospital-associated overuse; results showed that the highest scores in this Medicare population were associated with nonteaching and for-profit hospitals, particularly in the South.

An assessment of prevalence and expenditure associated with discharge brain MRI in preterm infants

To assess national expenditure associated with preterm-infant brain MRI and potential impact of reduction per Choosing Wisely campaign 2015 recommendation to “avoid routine screening term-equivalent or discharge brain MRIs in preterm-infants”. Cross-sectional U.S. trend data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Kids’ Inpatient Database (KID) database (2006, 2009, 2012, 2016) was used to estimate overall national expenditure associated with brain MRI among infants with gestational age (GA) ≤36 weeks, and also when classified as ‘not indicated’ (NI-MRI) i.e., equivalent to routine use without clinical indications and regarded as low-value service (LVS). Associated cost was determined by querying CMS-database for physician-fee-schedules to find the highest global procedure-cost per cycle, then adjusting for inflation. Sensitivity-analyses were conducted to account for additional clinical charges associated with NI-MRI. 3,768 (0.26%) of 1,472,236 preterm-infants had brain MRI across all cycles (inflation-adjusted total $3,690,088). Overall proportion of brain MRIs increased across 2006–2012 from 0.25%-0.33% but decreased in 2016 to 0.16% (P<0.001). Inflation-adjusted overall expenditure by cycle was: 2006, $1,299,130 (95% CI: $987,505, $1,610,755); 2009, $1,194,208 (95% CI: $873,487, $1,516,154); 2012, $931,836 (95% CI: $666,114, $1,197,156); and 2016, $264,648 (95% CI: $172,061, $357,280). Prevalence for NI-MRI in 2006, 2009, 2012 and 2016 was 86% (n = 809), 88% (n = 940), 89% (n = 1028) and 50% (n = 299), respectively; and 70% were in infants 35–36 weeks GA. NI-MRI prevalence was not different over time by payer-type (Medicaid, private), sex or race/ethnicity (white, black, Hispanic); larger hospital size was significantly associated across 2006–2012 but this declined for all sizes in 2016, with most decline in larger hospitals (P for interaction <0.05). NI-MRI expenditure sensitivity-analysis with addition of cycle median total-admission-charge to inflation-adjusted CMS-fee was $1,190,919/$518,343, for 2012/2016 cycles respectively. National MRI prevalence in preterm infants (both overall and LVS) and associated expenditure decreased substantially post recommendation; however, annual savings are modest and unlikely to be >$1.2 million.

98179 Identifying Low-Value Care Across A Statewide Health System: Collaboration Between Quality, Population Health, Informatics, and Health Services Research

ABSTRACT IMPACT: This project demonstrates that addressing low-value care, which has the potential to cause patient harm, relies on novel data tools and collaboration between health system and research stakeholders. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Reducing low-value care, or patient care that offers no net benefit in specific clinical scenarios, is an important approach to improving value as it can simultaneously lower health care spending and improve quality. We describe an initiative to identify such care in a large statewide employer. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Claims data for self-funded University of California (UC) Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plan members during 2019 were abstracted from the University of California Health (UCH) Clinical Data Warehouse, a unique central database that includes electronic medical record data from &gt;5 million patients across UC medical campuses and all claims from UC self-funded health plans. UCH spans six academic health systems across California. The Milliman MedInsight Health Waste Calculator, a proprietary algorithm-based software tool, was used to identify low-value care and estimate associated spending. The HWC measures 48 low-value services using recommendations from the Choosing Wisely Campaign, the US Preventive Services Task Force, and other clinical specialty guidelines. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Of 43,882 members of the UC PPO, 11,174 (25.4%) received at least one low-value service. The HWC identified 50,103 eligible services and classified 35% as low-value. Total spending on low-value services ranged between $2,209,516 and $5,089,866, based on a more or less conservative estimate. Across the five sites, the proportion of low-value services ranged from 31% to 39%. Five services comprised 65% of costs from low-value care: annual EKGs, preoperative baseline labs for low-risk surgeries, vitamin D deficiency screening, imaging for eye disease, and headache imaging. The top five services by order frequency were annual EKGs, vitamin D tests, preoperative labs, antibiotics for upper respiratory infections, and imaging for eye disease. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: Low-value care is prevalent and costly within a large statewide employer. Collaborative multidisciplinary partnerships between employers, health systems, informatics, and researchers can leverage existing data to identify opportunities for improving the value of care for covered populations.

Trends in Low-Value Health Service Use and Spending in the US Medicare Fee-for-Service Program, 2014-2018

Low-value care, defined as care offering no net benefit in specific clinical scenarios, is associated with harmful outcomes in patients and wasteful spending. Despite a national education campaign and increasing attention on reducing health care waste, recent trends in low-value care delivery remain unknown. To assess national trends in low-value care use and spending. In this cross-sectional study, analyses of low-value care use and spending from 2014 to 2018 were conducted using 100% Medicare fee-for-service enrollment and claims data. Included individuals were aged 65 years or older and continuously enrolled in Medicare parts A, B, and D during each measurement year and the previous year. Data were analyzed from September 2019 through December 2020. Being enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare for a period of time, in years. The Milliman MedInsight Health Waste Calculator was used to assess 32 claims-based measures of low-value care associated with Choosing Wisely recommendations and other professional guidelines. The calculator designates services as wasteful, likely wasteful, or not wasteful based on an absence of indication of appropriate use in the claims history; calculator-designated wasteful services were defined as low-value care. Spending was calculated as claim-line level (ie, spending on the low-value service) and claim level (ie, spending on the low-value service plus associated services), adjusting for inflation. Among 21 045 759 individuals with fee-for-service Medicare (mean [SD] age, 77.4 [7.9] years; 12 515 915 [59.5%] women), the percentage receiving any of 32 low-value services decreased from 36.3% (95% CI, 36.3%-36.4%) to 33.6% (95% CI, 33.6%-33.6%) from 2014 to 2018. Uses of low-value services per 1000 individuals decreased from 677.8 (95% CI, 676.2-679.5) to 632.7 (95% CI, 632.6-632.8) from 2014 to 2018. Three services comprised approximately two-thirds of uses among 32 low-value services per 1000 individuals: preoperative laboratory testing decreased from 213.8 (95% CI, 213.4-214.2) to 166.2 (95% CI, 166.2-166.2), while opioids for back pain increased from 154.4 (95% CI, 153.6-155.2) to 182.1 (95% CI, 182.1-182.1) and antibiotics for upper respiratory infections increased from 75.0 (95% CI, 75.0-75.1) to 82 (95% CI, 82.0-82.0). Spending per 1000 individuals on low-value care also decreased, from $52 765.5 (95% CI, $51 952.3-$53 578.6) to $46 921.7 (95% CI, $46 593.7-$47 249.7) at the claim-line level and from $160 070.4 (95% CI, $158 999.8-$161 141.0) to $144 741.1 (95% CI, $144 287.5-$145 194.7) at the claim level. This cross-sectional study found that among individuals with fee-for-service Medicare receiving any of 32 measured services, low-value care use and spending decreased marginally from 2014 to 2018, despite a national education campaign in collaboration with clinician specialty societies and increased attention on low-value care. While most use of low-value care came from 3 services, 1 of these was opioid prescriptions, which increased over time despite the harms associated with their use. These findings may represent several opportunities to prevent patient harm and lower spending.