Cargando…

What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review

OBJECTIVES: Low-value care can harm patients and healthcare systems. Despite a decade of global endeavours, low value care has persisted. Identification of barriers and enablers is essential for effective deimplementation of low-value care. This scoping review is an evidence summary of barriers, ena...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gangathimmaiah, Vinay, Drever, Natalie, Evans, Rebecca, Moodley, Nishila, Sen Gupta, Tarun, Cardona, Magnolia, Carlisle, Karen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10649718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37945299
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072762
_version_ 1785135615920046080
author Gangathimmaiah, Vinay
Drever, Natalie
Evans, Rebecca
Moodley, Nishila
Sen Gupta, Tarun
Cardona, Magnolia
Carlisle, Karen
author_facet Gangathimmaiah, Vinay
Drever, Natalie
Evans, Rebecca
Moodley, Nishila
Sen Gupta, Tarun
Cardona, Magnolia
Carlisle, Karen
author_sort Gangathimmaiah, Vinay
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Low-value care can harm patients and healthcare systems. Despite a decade of global endeavours, low value care has persisted. Identification of barriers and enablers is essential for effective deimplementation of low-value care. This scoping review is an evidence summary of barriers, enablers and features of effective interventions for deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice worldwide. DESIGN: A mixed-methods scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O’Malley framework. DATA SOURCES: Medline, CINAHL, Embase, EMCare, Scopus and grey literature were searched from inception to 5 December 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary studies which employed qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods approaches to explore deimplementation of low-value care in an EM setting and reported barriers, enablers or interventions were included. Reviews, protocols, perspectives, comments, opinions, editorials, letters to editors, news articles, books, chapters, policies, guidelines and animal studies were excluded. No language limits were applied. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Study selection, data collection and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Barriers, enablers and interventions were mapped to the domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for quality assessment. RESULTS: The search yielded 167 studies. A majority were quantitative studies (90%, 150/167) that evaluated interventions (86%, 143/167). Limited provider abilities, diagnostic uncertainty, lack of provider insight, time constraints, fear of litigation, and patient expectations were the key barriers. Enablers included leadership commitment, provider engagement, provider training, performance feedback to providers and shared decision-making with patients. Interventions included one or more of the following facets: education, stakeholder engagement, audit and feedback, clinical decision support, nudge, clinical champions and training. Multifaceted interventions were more likely to be effective than single-faceted interventions. Effectiveness of multifaceted interventions was influenced by fidelity of the intervention facets. Use of behavioural change theories such as the Theoretical Domains Framework in the published studies appeared to enhance the effectiveness of interventions to deimplement low-value care. CONCLUSION: High-fidelity, multifaceted interventions that incorporated education, stakeholder engagement, audit/feedback and clinical decision support, were administered daily and lasted longer than 1 year were most effective in achieving deimplementation of low-value care in emergency departments. This review contributes the best available evidence to date, but further rigorous, theory-informed, qualitative and mixed-methods studies are needed to supplement the growing body of evidence to effectively deimplement low-value care in emergency medicine practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10649718
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106497182023-11-09 What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review Gangathimmaiah, Vinay Drever, Natalie Evans, Rebecca Moodley, Nishila Sen Gupta, Tarun Cardona, Magnolia Carlisle, Karen BMJ Open Emergency Medicine OBJECTIVES: Low-value care can harm patients and healthcare systems. Despite a decade of global endeavours, low value care has persisted. Identification of barriers and enablers is essential for effective deimplementation of low-value care. This scoping review is an evidence summary of barriers, enablers and features of effective interventions for deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice worldwide. DESIGN: A mixed-methods scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O’Malley framework. DATA SOURCES: Medline, CINAHL, Embase, EMCare, Scopus and grey literature were searched from inception to 5 December 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary studies which employed qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods approaches to explore deimplementation of low-value care in an EM setting and reported barriers, enablers or interventions were included. Reviews, protocols, perspectives, comments, opinions, editorials, letters to editors, news articles, books, chapters, policies, guidelines and animal studies were excluded. No language limits were applied. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Study selection, data collection and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Barriers, enablers and interventions were mapped to the domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for quality assessment. RESULTS: The search yielded 167 studies. A majority were quantitative studies (90%, 150/167) that evaluated interventions (86%, 143/167). Limited provider abilities, diagnostic uncertainty, lack of provider insight, time constraints, fear of litigation, and patient expectations were the key barriers. Enablers included leadership commitment, provider engagement, provider training, performance feedback to providers and shared decision-making with patients. Interventions included one or more of the following facets: education, stakeholder engagement, audit and feedback, clinical decision support, nudge, clinical champions and training. Multifaceted interventions were more likely to be effective than single-faceted interventions. Effectiveness of multifaceted interventions was influenced by fidelity of the intervention facets. Use of behavioural change theories such as the Theoretical Domains Framework in the published studies appeared to enhance the effectiveness of interventions to deimplement low-value care. CONCLUSION: High-fidelity, multifaceted interventions that incorporated education, stakeholder engagement, audit/feedback and clinical decision support, were administered daily and lasted longer than 1 year were most effective in achieving deimplementation of low-value care in emergency departments. This review contributes the best available evidence to date, but further rigorous, theory-informed, qualitative and mixed-methods studies are needed to supplement the growing body of evidence to effectively deimplement low-value care in emergency medicine practice. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10649718/ /pubmed/37945299 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072762 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Emergency Medicine
Gangathimmaiah, Vinay
Drever, Natalie
Evans, Rebecca
Moodley, Nishila
Sen Gupta, Tarun
Cardona, Magnolia
Carlisle, Karen
What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review
title What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review
title_full What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review
title_fullStr What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review
title_full_unstemmed What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review
title_short What works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? A scoping review
title_sort what works for and what hinders deimplementation of low-value care in emergency medicine practice? a scoping review
topic Emergency Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10649718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37945299
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072762
work_keys_str_mv AT gangathimmaiahvinay whatworksforandwhathindersdeimplementationoflowvaluecareinemergencymedicinepracticeascopingreview
AT drevernatalie whatworksforandwhathindersdeimplementationoflowvaluecareinemergencymedicinepracticeascopingreview
AT evansrebecca whatworksforandwhathindersdeimplementationoflowvaluecareinemergencymedicinepracticeascopingreview
AT moodleynishila whatworksforandwhathindersdeimplementationoflowvaluecareinemergencymedicinepracticeascopingreview
AT senguptatarun whatworksforandwhathindersdeimplementationoflowvaluecareinemergencymedicinepracticeascopingreview
AT cardonamagnolia whatworksforandwhathindersdeimplementationoflowvaluecareinemergencymedicinepracticeascopingreview
AT carlislekaren whatworksforandwhathindersdeimplementationoflowvaluecareinemergencymedicinepracticeascopingreview