Low-value Tests Research Articles

Teaching novice clinicians how to reduce diagnostic waste and errors by applying the Toyota Production System.

Background Diagnostic waste, defined as the ordering of low value tests, increases cost, causes delays, increases complexity, and reduces reliability. The Toyota Production System (TPS) is a powerful approach for process improvement that has not been applied to the diagnostic process. We describe a curriculum based on tools and principles of TPS that provides medical students with an approach for reducing diagnostic waste and improving patient management. Methods A 2-day elective course "Fixing Healthcare Delivery" was offered to medical students at the University of Florida, Gainesville. A section within the course had three learning objectives related to TPS: (1) define value in health care; (2) describe how diagnostic waste leads to time delays and diagnostic errors; and (3) apply sequential and iterative value streams for patient management. Instruction methods included videos, readings, and online quizzes followed by a 2-h seminar with facilitated discussion and active problem solving. Results During the 3 years the course was offered students (n = 25) achieved average scores of 95% on a pre-seminar test of manufacturing principles applied to the diagnostic and management process. Course evaluations averaged 4.94 out of 5 (n = 31). Conclusions Students appreciated the application of the TPS principles to the diagnostic process and expressed the desire to apply these manufacturing principles in their future diagnostic and management decision-making.

Deimplementation of Routine Chest X-rays in Adult Intensive Care Units.

Choosing Wisely® is a national initiative to deimplement or reduce low-value care. However, there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of strategies to influence ordering patterns. We aimed to describe the effectiveness of an intervention to reduce daily chest X-ray (CXR) ordering in two intensive care units (ICUs) and evaluate deimplementation strategies. We aimed to describe the effectiveness of an intervention to reduce daily chest X-ray (CXR) ordering in two intensive care units (ICUs) and evaluate deimplementation strategies. The study was performed in the medical intensive care unit (MICU) and cardiovascular intensive care unit (CVICU) of an academic medical center in the United States from October 2015 to June 2016. The initiative included the staff of the MICU and CVICU (physicians, surgeons, nurse practitioners, fellows, residents, medical students, and X-ray technologists). We utilized provider education, peer champions, and weekly data feedback of CXR ordering rates. We analyzed the CXR ordering rates and factors facilitating or inhibiting deimplementation. Segmented linear time-series analysis suggested a small but statistically significant decrease in CXR ordering rates in the CVICU (P < .001) but not in the MICU. Facilitators of deimplementation, which were more prominent in the CVICU, included engagement of peer champions, stable staffing, and regular data feedback. Barriers included the need to establish goal CXR ordering rates, insufficient intervention visibility, and waning investment among medical residents in the MICU due to frequent rotation and competing priorities. Intervention modestly reduced CXRs ordered in one of two ICUs evaluated. Understanding why adoption differed between the two units may inform future interventions to deimplement low-value diagnostic tests.

Special Report

Special Report

Resident-Sensitive Processes of Care: Impact of Surgical Residents on Inpatient Testing

Health care value is a national priority, and there are substantial efforts to reduce overuse of low-value testing. Residency training programs and teaching hospitals have been implicated in excessive testing. We evaluated the impact of surgery residents on the frequency of inpatient testing and investigated potential inter-resident variation. Inpatient laboratory and imaging orders placed on general surgery services were extracted from an academic institution from 2014 to 2016 and linked to National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data. Using negative binomial mixed effects regression with unstructured covariance, we evaluated the frequency of testing orders compared with median use, accounting for case, patient, and attending-level variables. There were 111,055 laboratory orders and 7,360 imaging orders linked with 2,357 patients. Multivariable analysis demonstrated multiple significant predictors of increased testing including: postoperative complications, medical comorbidities, length of stay, relative value units, attending surgeon, and resident surgeon (95% CIs > 1, p < 0.05). Compared with the median resident physician, 47 residents (37.9%) placed significantly more laboratory orders, and 2 residents (1.6%) placed significantly more imaging orders (95% CI >1, p<0.05). Resident identification explained 3.5% of the total variation in laboratory ordering and 4.9% in imaging orders. Individual surgical residents had a significant association with the frequency of inpatient testing after adjusting for attending, case, and patient-level variables. There was greater resident variation in laboratory testing compared with imaging, yet surgical residents had small contributions to the total variation in both laboratory and imaging testing. Our models provide a means of identifying high users and could be used to educate residents on their ordering patterns.

Comparison of changes in retentive force and wear pattern of two stud attachments for implant overdentures: An in vitro study

Context: Edentulous patients often complain about the instability of mandibular denture. To overcome that, implant-supported overdentures (IODs) have been applied as a good prosthetic option. Aims: The current study compared the changes in retentive force and patterns of surface wear of nylon rings of two stud attachments (ball and locator) upon cyclic loading. Subjects and Methods: Two implant analogs were fixed parallel to each other, 22 mm apart, in custom-made rectangular blocks for each attachment system. Ten nylon inserts of each attachment system were tested. Universal testing machine was used to measure the retentive force, and a low-value fatigue testing machine was used for cyclic loading of 2500 insertion–removal cycles. Surface changes of the components were evaluated by scanning electron microscope (SEM). Statistical Analysis Used: Paired Student's t-test was used to determine groups that were statistically significant. Results: The greatest retention loss rate, i.e., the difference between the initial retentive force and final retentive force was observed in the ball attachment (6.20 N) followed by locator attachment (3.70 N). The results were found to be statistically significant (d ≤ 0.001**). Upon SEM analysis, the nylon inserts of ball attachment revealed more surface wear compared to that of locator attachment. Conclusions: For greater retention and longer function, locator overdenture attachment should be preferred for implant overdentures over ball attachment.

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

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

Defining low-value PSA testing in a large retrospective cohort: Finding common ground between discordant guidelines

BackgroundReports of low-value prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing (testing in which the harms outweigh the benefits) generally employ population level data sources. While such results may be generalizable, they often lack the detail necessary to understand provider clinical decision making and guideline concordance. Using a retrospective study of PSA testing at our institution we intend to characterize the frequency and patterns associated with low-value PSA testing. MethodsWe leveraged the electronic health record to determine guideline-defined low-value testing in our health system from 07/01/2012 to 06/30/2017. Secondarily, we measured the between-testing interval for repeat tests and the rates of prostate cancer risk factors and comorbidities among men receiving screening. ResultsOverall, 21,145 PSA tests were performed on 12,303 men. The rate of low-value testing ranged from 23.4 to 56.8%, depending upon the specific guideline. For repeat tests, the median between-testing interval was 12.6 months. Risk factors for prostate cancer were uncommon, but more frequent in men age <55 years compared to men age 55–69 years (17.6% vs. 13.5%, p < 0.001). Screened older men (age >70 years) were more likely to have a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 3, compared to the 55–69 reference group (31.4% vs. 17.3%, p < 0.001). ConclusionLow-value prostate cancer testing is prevalent. Between-testing intervals were often times shorter than recommended. Screening among younger men was frequent despite low rates of risk factors. High rates of comorbidity may limit life expectancy among older men receiving screening. These findings highlight the need for improved guidance with prostate cancer screening.

'What the hell is water?' How to use deliberate clinical inertia in common emergency department situations.

Appropriate deliberate clinical inertia refers to the art of doing nothing as a positive clinical response. It includes shared decision-making to improve patient care with the use of clinical judgement. We discuss common clinical scenarios where the use of deliberate clinical inertia can occur. The insertion of peripheral intravenous cannulae, investigating patients with suspected renal colic and the investigation of low risk chest pain are all opportunities for the thoughtful clinician to 'stand there' and use effective patient communication to avoid low value tests and procedures. Awareness is key to identifying these opportunities to practice deliberate clinical inertia, as many of the situations may be so much a part of our environment that they are hidden in plain view.

Abstract 32: Have Choosing Wisely Recommendations Changed Diagnostic Testing Patterns for Patients With Syncope?

Background: Syncope is a common reason for emergency department visits. Guidelines suggest minimal initial workup, including history, physical exam, and ECG testing. Additional cardiac testing is recommended in only high risk patients and neuroimaging is rarely indicated. Because of the low yield of neuroimaging, in 2012, the Choosing Wisely campaign recommended against its use for syncope. Our objective was to examine trends in cardiac testing and neuroimaging of patients presenting to the ED with syncope, before and after the Choosing Wisely recommendations and to describe hospital variation in testing rates. Methods: We linked State Inpatient and Emergency Department Databases to conduct a retrospective study of all ED visits in 2009 and 2013 for 8 states reporting procedure utilization. We calculated rates of ECG, advanced cardiac testing (echocardiogram, stress testing, diagnostic catheterization) and neuroimaging (head CT, brain MRI, carotid ultrasound) for all adults with a discharge diagnosis of syncope. Differences between years were estimated using mixed effect regression modeling adjusted for patient characteristics, comorbidities, and hospital random effects. Results: We identified 287,261 ED visits for syncope in 2009 and 315,221 ED visits in 2013 from 676 hospitals. Between 2009 and 2013, adjusted rates of ECG testing increased from 81.1% of discharges to 84.3% (p&lt;.0001). Rates of advanced cardiac testing increased from 10.3% to 12.4% (p&lt;.0001), driven primarily by a substantial increase in the use of echocardiograms (8.3% vs 11.3%, p&lt;.0001). Rates of neuroimaging increased from 36.0% to 42.0% (p&lt;.0001) with increased utilization of all tests. Rates of ECG, advanced cardiac testing and neuroimaging varied significantly between hospitals in both years (Figure). The median hospital-level change in testing between years was 1.6% (IQR -3.5 to 11.2) for ECG, 1.2% (IQR -1.8 to 5.9) for advanced cardiac imaging and 4.2% (IQR -5.3 to 18.4) for neuroimaging. Conclusions: Among patients presenting to the ED with syncope, rates of both high- and low-value diagnostic testing increased between 2009 and 2013, with substantial variation between hospitals. Thus, the 2012 Choosing Wisely recommendations do not appear to have had a significant effect on testing for patients presenting with syncope.

The Changing Role of Patient Education in Osteoporosis.

The Changing Role of Patient Education in Osteoporosis.

Predictors of care for patients with cancer of unknown primary site in three Australian hospitals.

Cancer of unknown primary site (CUP) is a medically challenging malignancy with a poor prognosis. We describe an incident tertiary CUP patient cohort and identify factors predictive of specific types of health care. We reviewed the medical records of 217 patients diagnosed with CUP (2006-2011) in three public hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. We systematically abstracted data and performed multivariable logistic regression to identify factors predictive of tumor biopsy, surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and palliative care. The median age at CUP diagnosis was 75 years (range 23-98) and 52% were male. The most common mode of presentation was emergency department admission (57%). Serum tumor markers were performed in 42%, fine needle aspiration alone in 15% and core biopsy in 52%. Younger age, health service referral, oncologist review and a family history of cancer predicted receipt of a biopsy (77%). Cancer-related surgery (17%) was more likely in younger patients, those presenting with pain, and those with single lymph node metastases. Younger age and good performance score predicted receipt of chemotherapy (22%). The location of metastases predicted receipt of radiotherapy (28%). Older age, emergency presentation, poor performance score and no oncology review predicted receipt of palliative care only (52%); 77% were referred for palliative care during hospitalization. The determinants of care were generally consistent with international CUP clinical guidelines. Areas of future research include potential underinvestigation and undertreatment of older patients, overuse of certain low-value diagnostic tests, suboptimal use of immunohistochemistry and mammography and underreferral to palliative care.

Low-Value Image Ordering Is Influenced by Ownership of Imaging Equipment

Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are low-value tests for patients with uncomplicated low back pain or headache without

Choosing Wisely in Oncology: Are We Ready For Value-Based Care?

In 2012, ASCO created the Top Five Choosing Wisely (CW) list of low-value tests and procedures for which there is little evidence of benefit. ASCO's Quality Oncology Practice Initiative, an oncologist-led practice-based quality assessment program, includes measures on the basis of these recommendations. CW test measures from spring and fall 2013, spring 2014, and spring 2015 were evaluated for concordance rates, change in the concordance over time, and variability by practice characteristics. Practice characteristics recorded included geographic location, academic affiliation, number of new cases, number of medical oncologists, and rounds of participation in Quality Oncology Practice Initiative. Medians, interquartile ranges, and percentages were calculated for concordance with recommendations and practice characteristics. Change in recommendation concordance over time was assessed using linear regression models. From 2013 to 2015, 341 unique oncology practices abstracted the CW measures. Performance varied for specific recommendations. The median concordance was best for measure 1 (patients with low or undocumented performance status who received chemotherapy), where concordance ranged from 78.4% to 83.3%. The lowest concordance was for measure 3 (use of biomarkers or advanced imaging tests for surveillance in early breast cancer), where concordance ranged from 67.7% to 74.2%. Performance on CW measures varied markedly by individual practice. Variability over time and by practice characteristics was observed. Performance on ASCO's CW demonstrates room for improvement. Concordance rates varied substantially by practice. Further education on CW measures is needed to improve patient care and enhance value.

P118: Effects of system design on laboratory utilization in the emergency department: the case for INR &amp; aPTT

Introduction: In the context of a shrinking healthcare budget, poor physician cost awareness, and continued over-utilization of low-value tests in the emergency department, we re-designed our computerized order entry system to reduce the use of coagulation testing. Methods: A hospital-based prospective pre-post analysis following de-bundling of INRPTT testing in two academic hospital emergency departments (annual visits 140,000). All participants aged 18 years or older undergoing evaluation and/or treatment at either of during the period of August 1, 2015 to July 24, 2016 were included. Primary outcome is coagulation testing utilization rates and associated costs. Results: Unbundling INR and aPTT testing resulted in significantly decreased bundled INRPTT testing relative to baseline (INRPTT tests per patient per day: 0.60 [95% CI: 0.57-0.62] vs. 0.98 [95% CI: 0.98-0.99], p=0.000), with significantly increased targeted testing (INR tests per patient per day: 0.39 [95% CI: 0.37-0.42] vs. 0.00 [95% CI: 0.00-0.01], p=0.000; PTT tests per patient per day: 0.33 [95% CI: 0.30-0.36] vs. 0.01 [95% CI: 0.00-0.01], p=0.000). As a result of unbundling, there was a significant decrease in costs associated with coagulation testing relative to baseline (Cost per day: $958.52 [INRPTT $592.78+INR $183.91+PTT $181.83] vs. $1,074.50 [INRPTT $1,069.76+INR $2.06+PTT $2.68], p=0.000), realizing estimated daily and yearly savings of $115.98 and $42,332.70, respectively. Conclusion: Compared to baseline practice patterns, unbundling coagulation testing resulted in the reduction of coagulation testing suggesting system design and user workflows to be an integral factor to provider practice patterns. Given the significant cost-savings, we recommend institutions carefully re-evaluate their system design and user workflows to optimize emergency department laboratory utilization.

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

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. 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. 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. 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.

Physician Service Attribution Methods for Examining Provision of Low-Value Care.

Objectives:There has been significant research on provider attribution for quality and cost. Low-value care is an area of heightened focus, with little of the focus being on measurement; a key methodological decision is how to attribute delivered services and procedures. We illustrate the difference in relative and absolute physician- and panel-attributed services and procedures using overuse in cervical cancer screening.Study Design:A retrospective, cross-sectional study in an integrated health care system.Methods:We used 2013 physician-level data from Group Health Cooperative to calculate two utilization attributions: (1) panel attribution with the procedure assigned to the physician’s predetermined panel, regardless of who performed the procedure; and (2) physician attribution with the procedure assigned to the performing physician. We calculated the percentage of low-value cervical cancer screening tests and ranked physicians within the clinic using the two utilization attribution methods.Results:The percentage of low-value cervical cancer screening varied substantially between physician and panel attributions. Across the whole delivery system, median panel- and physician-attributed percentages were 15 percent and 10 percent, respectively. Among sampled clinics, panel-attributed percentages ranged between 10 percent and 17 percent, and physician-attributed percentages ranged between 9 percent and 13 percent. Within a clinic, median panel-attributed screening percentage was 17 percent (range 0 percent–27 percent) and physician-attributed percentage was 11 percent (range 0 percent–24 percent); physician rank varied by attribution method.Conclusions:The attribution method is an important methodological decision when developing low-value care measures since measures may ultimately have an impact on national benchmarking and quality scores. Cross-organizational dialogue and transparency in low-value care measurement will become increasingly important for all stakeholders.

Low-Value Service Use in Provider Organizations.

To assess whether provider organizations exhibit distinct profiles of low-value service provision. 2007-2011 Medicare fee-for-service claims and enrollment data. Use of 31 services that provide minimal clinical benefit was measured for 4,039,733 beneficiaries served by 3,137 provider organizations. Variation across organizations, persistence within organizations over time, and correlations in use of different types of low-value services within organizations were estimated via multilevel modeling, with adjustment for beneficiary sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Organizations provided 45.6 low-value services per 100 beneficiaries on average, with considerable variation across organizations (90th/10th percentile ratio, 1.78; 95 percent CI, 1.72-1.84), including substantial between-organization variation within hospital referral regions (90th/10th percentile ratio, 1.66; 95 percent CI, 1.60-1.71). Low-value service use within organizations was highly correlated over time (r, 0.98; 95 percent CI, 0.97-0.99) and positively correlated between 13 of 15 pairs of service categories (average r, 0.26; 95 percent CI, 0.24-0.28), with the greatest correlation between low-value imaging and low-value cardiovascular testing and procedures (r, 0.54). Use of low-value services in provider organizations exhibited substantial variation, high persistence, and modest consistency across service types. These findings are consistent with organizations shaping the practice patterns of affiliated physicians.

Watchful Waiting Strategy May Reduce Low-Value Diagnostic Testing.

PCPs need effective communication strategies to address patient requests for low-value testing while sustaining patient-provider partnerships. Watchful waiting - allowing a negotiated period of time to pass before making a firm testing decision - shows promise as a tool for addressing patient requests for low-value testing. Observational analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial of a communication intervention designed to boost patient-centeredness and reduce low-value test ordering among 61 resident primary care physicians. Intervention effectiveness was assessed during follow-up encounters of unannounced standardized patients (SPs) who requested low-value tests. We examined associations between five physician counseling behaviors and overall patient-centeredness (Measure of Patient-Centered Communication) and requested test ordering. During 155 SP encounters, residents most commonly used reassurance (96% of encounters), evidence-based recommendations (97%), and watchful waiting (68 %). Resident advice to pursue watchful waiting was associated with 39% lower likelihood of test ordering (adjusted marginal effect of -38.6% [95% CI -43.6 to -33.6]). When all communication behaviors were examined together, only watchful waiting was significantly associated with test ordering (marginal effect of -38% [95% CI -44.3% to -31.7%]). Overall patient-centeredness was not associated with low-value testing. Resident physician counseling to pursue watchful waiting was associated with less ordering of requested low-value diagnostic tests, while overall patient-centeredness was not.

Patient and Physician Attitudes Toward Low-Value Diagnostic Tests.

Patient and Physician Attitudes Toward Low-Value Diagnostic Tests.

Comparing Care Given by Primary Care Physicians and Advanced Practice Clinicians

In a study of data from two national ambulatory care surveys, researchers evaluated quality of primary care by assessing use of low-value and guideline-discordant tests and treatments that were provided during care of patients who had one of three common outpatient conditions (upper respiratory infection, headache, or back …