Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Measures Used to Assess the Impact of Interventions to Reduce Low-Value Care: a Systematic Review

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Studies of interventions to reduce low-value care are increasingly common. However, little is known about how the effects of such interventions are measured. To characterize measures used to assess interventions to reduce low-value care. We searched PubMed and Web of Science to identify studies published between 2010 and 2016 that examined the effects of interventions to reduce low-value care. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov to identify ongoing studies. We extracted data on characteristics of studies, interventions, and measures. We then developed a framework to classify measures into the following categories: utilization (e.g., number of tests ordered), outcome (e.g., mortality), appropriateness (e.g., overuse of antibiotics), patient-reported (e.g., satisfaction), provider-reported (e.g., satisfaction), patient-provider interaction (e.g., informed decision-making elements), value, and cost. We also determined whether each measure was designed to assess unintended consequences. A total of 1805 studies were identified, of which 101 published and 16 ongoing studies were included. Of published studies ( N  = 101), 68% included at least one measure of utilization, 41% of an outcome, 52% of appropriateness, 36% of cost, 8% patient-reported, and 3% provider-reported. Funded studies were more likely to use patient-reported measures (17% vs 0%). Of ongoing studies (registered trials) ( N  = 16), 69% included at least one measure of utilization, 75% of an outcome, 50% of appropriateness, 19% of cost, 50% patient-reported, 13% provider-reported, and 6% patient-provider interaction. Of published studies, 34% included at least one measure of an unintended consequence as compared to 63% of ongoing studies. Most published studies focused on reductions in utilization rather than on clinically meaningful measures (e.g., improvements in appropriateness, patient-reported outcomes) or unintended consequences. Investigators should systematically incorporate more clinically meaningful measures into their study designs, and sponsors should develop standardized guidance for the evaluation of interventions to reduce low-value care. The online version of this article (10.1007/s11606-019-05069-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Measuring low-value care in Medicare.

          Despite the importance of identifying and reducing wasteful health care use, few direct measures of overuse have been developed. Direct measures are appealing because they identify specific services to limit and can characterize low-value care even among the most efficient providers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Interventions Aimed at Reducing Use of Low-Value Health Services: A Systematic Review.

            The effectiveness of different types of interventions to reduce low-value care has been insufficiently summarized to allow for translation to practice. This article systematically reviews the literature on the effectiveness of interventions to reduce low-value care and the quality of those studies. We found that multicomponent interventions addressing both patient and clinician roles in overuse have the greatest potential to reduce low-value care. Clinical decision support and performance feedback are promising strategies with a solid evidence base, and provider education yields changes by itself and when paired with other strategies. Further research is needed on the effectiveness of pay-for-performance, insurer restrictions, and risk-sharing contracts to reduce use of low-value care. While the literature reveals important evidence on strategies used to reduce low-value care, meaningful gaps persist. More experimentation, paired with rigorous evaluation and publication, is needed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Measuring the effect of Choosing Wisely: an integrated framework to assess campaign impact on low-value care.

              The Choosing Wisely campaign began in the USA in 2012 to encourage physicians and patients to discuss inappropriate and potentially harmful tests, treatments and procedures. Since its inception, the campaign has grown substantially and has been adopted by 12 countries around the world. Of great interest to countries implementing the campaign, is the effectiveness of Choosing Wisely to reduce overutilisation. This article presents an integrated measurement framework that may be used to assess the impact of a Choosing Wisely campaign on physician and provider awareness and attitudes on low-value care, provider practice behaviour and overuse of low-value services.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of General Internal Medicine
                J GEN INTERN MED
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                0884-8734
                1525-1497
                June 27 2019
                Article
                10.1007/s11606-019-05069-5
                6712188
                31250366
                90672c5d-b56e-47af-b0fc-b74d0817d1a0
                © 2019

                http://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article