Literature DB >> 2115577

Practice guidelines to reduce testing in the hospital.

T J Wachtel1, P O'Sullivan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To reduce testing among hospitalized patients using practice guidelines for any of 14 medical problems.
DESIGN: Comparison of test use before and after implementation of guidelines. The guidelines were developed by consensus panels of self-selected participating physicians. Non-participating physicians were monitored during the same periods. In addition, the two groups of physicians were evaluated similarly for their management of three medical problems for which guidelines were not developed.
SETTING: Acute care hospital. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: 1,638 hospitalized patients and their 79 physicians. INTERVENTION: Implementation of practice guidelines for the care of hospitalized patients. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN
RESULTS: Geometric mean charges expressed in inflation-adjusted dollars were used as measures of test use. For the intervention group, laboratory tests decreased by 20.6%, x-rays by 42.3%, and EKGs by 34.2%. All the decreases were significant (p = 0.001). The non-participating physicians who were higher test users during both years of the study also achieved significant (p less than 0.05) but smaller reductions during the intervention year: 13.9% for laboratory tests, 30.3% for x-rays, and 21.8% for EKGs, perhaps because the same residents were involved in the care of both groups of patients. For the non-guideline diagnoses, the participating physicians achieved reductions of 11.1% for laboratory tests and 19.2% for x-rays, and a 3.5% increase in EKGs. Two-way analyses of variance that took into account the reductions in testing achieved by non-participants, or by participants with non-guideline diagnoses, revealed no significant reduction in testing attributable directly to the guidelines except for EKGs. Follow up of the participating physicians during the six months after the end of the intervention revealed that testing remained at the lower level achieved while the guidelines were in use. Outcome of care, as measured by deaths in the hospital, deaths within 90 days of discharge, and readmissions within 90 days of discharge, was not affected by the use of the guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: 1) A large group of physicians could be recruited in a hospital to establish practice guidelines by group consensus. 2) These self-selected physicians were willing to use the guidelines (or allow the housestaff to use them) while caring for their patients. 3) Participating physicians were able to achieve substantial and significant reductions in testing without any demonstrable adverse effect on quality of care as measured by deaths and readmissions, and without any demonstrable shifting of resources from the inpatient to the outpatient setting of care. 4) The reductions in testing, whether caused by the guidelines or not, persisted for at least six months beyond the end of the period of implementation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2115577     DOI: 10.1007/bf02600402

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  22 in total

1.  The 1988 report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure.

Authors: 
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1988-05

2.  Guidelines for medical practice: necessary but not sufficient.

Authors:  H C Sox
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1989 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Inpatient management protocols to reduce health care costs.

Authors:  T Wachtel; A W Moulton; J Pezzullo; M Hamolsky
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1986 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 4.  Do practice guidelines guide practice? The effect of a consensus statement on the practice of physicians.

Authors:  J Lomas; G M Anderson; K Domnick-Pierre; E Vayda; M W Enkin; W J Hannah
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-11-09       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Standards for practice: effectiveness and acceptance.

Authors:  E H Estes; R J Sullivan
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Guidelines for ambulatory electrocardiography. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Subcommittee on Ambulatory Electrocardiography).

Authors:  C Fisch; R W DeSanctis; H T Dodge; T J Reeves; S L Weinberg
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Changing physician test ordering in a university hospital. An intervention of physician participation, explicit criteria, and feedback.

Authors:  J S Spiegel; M F Shapiro; B Berman; S Greenfield
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1989-03

8.  The doctor's master.

Authors:  N G Levinsky
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1984-12-13       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  The "rationing" of medical care.

Authors:  V R Fuchs
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1984-12-13       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  The distinction between cost and charges.

Authors:  S A Finkler
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  6 in total

1.  Standards, guidelines and clinical policies. Health Services Research Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-03-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Translating guidelines into practice. A systematic review of theoretic concepts, practical experience and research evidence in the adoption of clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  D A Davis; A Taylor-Vaisey
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1997-08-15       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Test ordering pattern at the chemical pathology laboratory, hospital universiti sains malaysia.

Authors:  F S Al-Joudi; N A Wahab; H Nordin
Journal:  Malays J Med Sci       Date:  2003-01

Review 4.  Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  A S Basinski
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1995-12-01       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  The adoption of preventive care practice guidelines by primary care physicians: do actions match intentions?

Authors:  S Weingarten; E Stone; R Hayward; S Tunis; M Pelter; H Huang; R Kristopaitis
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Effect of guidelines on primary care physician use of PSA screening: results from the Community Tracking Study Physician Survey.

Authors:  Carmen E Guerra; Phyllis A Gimotty; Judy A Shea; José A Pagán; J Sanford Schwartz; Katrina Armstrong
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2008-06-12       Impact factor: 2.583

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.