Literature DB >> 33199293

Strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care: a systematic review.

Toshihiko Takada1, Pauline Heus2, Sander van Doorn1, Christiana A Naaktgeboren1, Jan-Willem Weenink3, Simone A van Dulmen4, Lotty Hooft2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is recognised that medical tests are overused in primary care; however, it is unclear how best to reduce their use. AIM: To identify which strategies are effective in reducing the use of low-value medical tests in primary care settings. DESIGN AND
SETTING: Systematic review.
METHOD: The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Rx for Change were searched (January 1990 to November 2019) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care settings. Two reviewers selected eligible RCTs, extracted data, and assessed their risk of bias.
RESULTS: Of the 16 RCTs included in the review, 11 reported a statistically significant reduction in the use of low-value medical tests. The median of the differences between the relative reductions in the intervention and control arms was 17% (interquartile range 12% to 24%). Strategies using reminders or audit/feedback showed larger reduction than those without these components (22% versus 14%, and 22% versus 13%, respectively) and patient-targeted strategies showed larger reductions than those not targeted at patients (51% versus 17%). Very few studies investigated the sustainability of the effect, adverse events, cost-effectiveness, or patient-reported outcomes related to reducing the use of low-value tests.
CONCLUSION: This review indicates that it is possible to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care, especially by using multiple components including reminders, audit/feedback, and patient-targeted interventions. To implement these strategies widely in primary care settings, more research is needed not only to investigate their effectiveness, but also to examine adverse events, cost-effectiveness, and patient-reported outcomes. © British Journal of General Practice 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  investigative techniques; medical overuse; medical tests; primary care; systematic review; unnecessary procedures

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33199293      PMCID: PMC7679149          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20X713693

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  43 in total

1.  Comparing cost effects of two quality strategies to improve test ordering in primary care: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Wim H J M Verstappen; Frits van Merode; Jeremy Grimshaw; Willy I Dubois; Richard P T M Grol; Trudy van der Weijden
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 2.038

2.  Too Little? Too Much? Primary care physicians' views on US health care: a brief report.

Authors:  Brenda E Sirovich; Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2011-09-26

3.  The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Alessandro Liberati; Douglas G Altman; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Cynthia Mulrow; Peter C Gøtzsche; John P A Ioannidis; Mike Clarke; P J Devereaux; Jos Kleijnen; David Moher
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-07-20       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 4.  Bias in recruitment to cluster randomized trials: a review of recent publications.

Authors:  Gwen Brierley; Sally Brabyn; David Torgerson; Judith Watson
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2011-06-20       Impact factor: 2.431

Review 5.  Influence of educational, audit and feedback, system based, and incentive and penalty interventions to reduce laboratory test utilization: a systematic review.

Authors:  Daniel M Kobewka; Paul E Ronksley; Jennifer A McKay; Alan J Forster; Carl van Walraven
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.694

6.  Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Authors:  Albert L Siu
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 7.  Interventions Aimed at Reducing Use of Low-Value Health Services: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Carrie H Colla; Alexander J Mainor; Courtney Hargreaves; Thomas Sequist; Nancy Morden
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2016-07-08       Impact factor: 3.929

Review 8.  Reducing Test Utilization in Hospital Settings: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Renuka S Bindraban; Maarten J Ten Berg; Christiana A Naaktgeboren; Mark H H Kramer; Wouter W Van Solinge; Prabath W B Nanayakkara
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 3.464

Review 9.  The effectiveness of interventions to improve laboratory requesting patterns among primary care physicians: a systematic review.

Authors:  Sharon L Cadogan; John P Browne; Colin P Bradley; Mary R Cahill
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2015-12-05       Impact factor: 7.327

10.  Temporal trends in use of tests in UK primary care, 2000-15: retrospective analysis of 250 million tests.

Authors:  Jack W O'Sullivan; Sarah Stevens; F D Richard Hobbs; Chris Salisbury; Paul Little; Ben Goldacre; Clare Bankhead; Jeffrey K Aronson; Rafael Perera; Carl Heneghan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2018-11-28
View more
  1 in total

1.  General practitioner gender and use of diagnostic procedures: a French cross-sectional study in training practices.

Authors:  Amandine Bouissiere; Marine Laperrouse; Henri Panjo; Virginie Ringa; Laurent Rigal; Laurent Letrilliart
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 3.006

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.