Effect of Educational Intervention on the Rate of Rarely Appropriate Outpatient Echocardiograms Ordered by Attending Academic Cardiologists: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Appropriate use criteria-based educational initiatives have been shown to improve transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) ordering practices of physicians in training. Whether such an intervention is successful with attending cardiologists remains unknown. Objective: To prospectively investigate the effect of an appropriate use criteria-based educational intervention on ordering of outpatient TTEs by attending academic cardiologists. Design, Setting, and Participants: We conducted a prospective, randomized clinical trial of an educational intervention designed to reduce the number of outpatient TTEs that were deemed to be rarely appropriate by published appropriate use criteria. Investigators classifying TTEs were blinded to participant groupings. The study was conducted within the cardiology division at the Massachusetts General Hospital, an academic quaternary care hospital. Staff members of the cardiology division were included; 66 cardiologists were randomized. The study was conducted from November 19, 2013, to June 1, 2014. An analysis of the evaluable population was performed. Interventions: The appropriate use criteria-based educational intervention consisted of a review lecture and electronic information card, as well as monthly individual physician feedback via email. The email described the percentage of rarely appropriate TTEs as well as the appropriate use criteria rationale for classifying studies as rarely appropriate. Main Outcomes and Measures: We hypothesized a priori that the educational intervention would reduce the number of rarely appropriate TTEs. The primary outcome was the rate of rarely appropriate TTEs.
Results: Of the 66 cardiologists enrolled in the study, 65 were included in the analysis (1 intervention cardiologist retired from practice during the study). The participants' mean (SD) age was 50.6 (10.5) years; 48 (73%) were men. Following intervention, the proportion of rarely appropriate TTEs was significantly lower in the intervention vs control group (143 of 1359 [10.5%] vs 285 of 1728 [16.5%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.88]; P = .01), and there was a nonsignificant increase in the proportion of appropriate TTEs in the intervention vs control group (1054 [77.6%] vs 1244 [72.0%]; OR, 1.38 [95% CI, 0.93-2.05]; P = .11). The most common of the 428 rarely appropriate indications were routine surveillance within 3 years after prosthetic valve insertion (73 [17.1%]), routine surveillance within 1 year for moderate or severe valvular stenosis (64 [15.0%]), and routine surveillance of cardiomyopathy (45 [10.5%]) or ventricular function (36 [8.4%]). Conclusions and Relevance: An appropriate use criteria-based educational and feedback intervention reduced the number of rarely appropriate TTEs ordered by attending academic cardiologists. This strategy may be feasible to improve TTE utilization among cardiologists, and this type of intervention warrants study in other practice environments. Trial Registration: clinicalrials.gov Identifier: NCT01968642.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes