Lauren M Westafer1,2, Ashley Kunz1, Patrycja Bugajska3, Amber Hughes3, Kathleen M Mazor4,5, Elizabeth M Schoenfeld1,2, Mihaela S Stefan2,6, Peter K Lindenauer2,6. 1. From the, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School-Baystate, Springfield, MA. 2. the, Institute for Healthcare Delivery and Population Science, University of Massachusetts Medical School-Baystate, Springfield, MA. 3. University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA. 4. Meyers Primary Care Institute, Worcester, MA. 5. and the, Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA. 6. and the, Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School-Baystate, Springfield, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Providers often pursue imaging in patients at low risk of pulmonary embolism (PE), resulting in imaging yields <10% and false-positive imaging rates of 10% to 25%. Attempts to curb overtesting have had only modest success and no interventions have used implementation science frameworks. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators to the adoption of evidence-based diagnostic testing for PE. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with a purposeful sample of providers. An interview guide was developed using the implementation science frameworks, consolidated framework for implementation research, and theoretical domains framework. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in an iterative process. Emergent themes were identified, discussed, and organized. RESULTS: We interviewed 23 providers from four hospital systems, and participants were diverse with regard to years in practice and practice setting. Barriers were predominately at the provider level and included lack of knowledge of the tools, particularly misunderstanding of the validated scoring systems in Wells, as well as risk avoidance and need for certainty. Barriers to prior implementation strategies included the perception of a clinical decision support (CDS) tool for PE as adding steps with little value; most participants reported that they overrode CDS interventions because they had already made the decision. All providers identified institution-level strategies as facilitators to use, including endorsed guidelines, audit feedback with peer comparison about imaging yield, and peer pressure. CONCLUSIONS: This exploration of the use of risk stratification tools in the evaluation of PE found that barriers to use primarily exist at the provider level, whereas facilitators to the use of these tools are largely perceived at the level of the institution. Future efforts to promote the evidence-based diagnosis of PE should be informed by these determinants.
OBJECTIVES: Providers often pursue imaging in patients at low risk of pulmonary embolism (PE), resulting in imaging yields <10% and false-positive imaging rates of 10% to 25%. Attempts to curb overtesting have had only modest success and no interventions have used implementation science frameworks. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators to the adoption of evidence-based diagnostic testing for PE. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with a purposeful sample of providers. An interview guide was developed using the implementation science frameworks, consolidated framework for implementation research, and theoretical domains framework. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in an iterative process. Emergent themes were identified, discussed, and organized. RESULTS: We interviewed 23 providers from four hospital systems, and participants were diverse with regard to years in practice and practice setting. Barriers were predominately at the provider level and included lack of knowledge of the tools, particularly misunderstanding of the validated scoring systems in Wells, as well as risk avoidance and need for certainty. Barriers to prior implementation strategies included the perception of a clinical decision support (CDS) tool for PE as adding steps with little value; most participants reported that they overrode CDS interventions because they had already made the decision. All providers identified institution-level strategies as facilitators to use, including endorsed guidelines, audit feedback with peer comparison about imaging yield, and peer pressure. CONCLUSIONS: This exploration of the use of risk stratification tools in the evaluation of PE found that barriers to use primarily exist at the provider level, whereas facilitators to the use of these tools are largely perceived at the level of the institution. Future efforts to promote the evidence-based diagnosis of PE should be informed by these determinants.
Authors: Arjun K Venkatesh; Jeffrey A Kline; D Mark Courtney; Carlos A Camargo; Michael C Plewa; Kristen E Nordenholz; Christopher L Moore; Peter B Richman; Howard A Smithline; Daren M Beam; Christopher Kabrhel Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2012-07-09
Authors: Alexander Goehler; Christopher Moore; Jennifer M Manne-Goehler; Jennifer Arango; Linda D'Amato; Howard P Forman; Jeffrey Weinreb Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Brian W Patterson; Michael S Pulia; Shashank Ravi; Peter L T Hoonakker; Ann Schoofs Hundt; Douglas Wiegmann; Emily J Wirkus; Stephen Johnson; Pascale Carayon Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2019-01-03 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Barry Donald Hutchinson; Patrick Navin; Edith M Marom; Mylene T Truong; John F Bruzzi Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David C Aron; Rosalind E Keith; Susan R Kirsh; Jeffery A Alexander; Julie C Lowery Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Christopher Kabrhel; Astrid Van Hylckama Vlieg; Alona Muzikanski; Adam Singer; Gregory J Fermann; Samuel Francis; Alex Limkakeng; Ann Marie Chang; Nicholas Giordano; Blair Parry Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Marije Bosch; Joanne E McKenzie; Jennie L Ponsford; Simon Turner; Marisa Chau; Emma J Tavender; Jonathan C Knott; Russell L Gruen; Jill J Francis; Sue E Brennan; Andrew Pearce; Denise A O'Connor; Duncan Mortimer; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Jeffrey V Rosenfeld; Susanne Meares; Tracy Smyth; Susan Michie; Sally E Green Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2019-01-17 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Tausif Billah; Lauren Gordon; Elizabeth M Schoenfeld; Bernard P Chang; Erik P Hess; Marc A Probst Journal: J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open Date: 2022-01-19
Authors: William E Soares; Alex Knee; Seth R Gemme; Ruth Hambrecht; Stacy Dybas; Kye E Poronsky; Shelby C Mader; Timothy J Mader Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2021-06-18 Impact factor: 6.762