Cargando…
Overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: Overuse of diagnostic testing substantially contributes to healthcare expenses and potentially exposes patients to unnecessary harm. Our objective was to systematically identify and examine studies that assessed the prevalence of diagnostic testing overuse across healthcare settings to e...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8685650/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33972387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012576 |
_version_ | 1784617875126878208 |
---|---|
author | Müskens, Joris L J M Kool, Rudolf Bertijn van Dulmen, Simone A Westert, Gert P |
author_facet | Müskens, Joris L J M Kool, Rudolf Bertijn van Dulmen, Simone A Westert, Gert P |
author_sort | Müskens, Joris L J M |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Overuse of diagnostic testing substantially contributes to healthcare expenses and potentially exposes patients to unnecessary harm. Our objective was to systematically identify and examine studies that assessed the prevalence of diagnostic testing overuse across healthcare settings to estimate the overall prevalence of low-value diagnostic overtesting. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science and Embase were searched from inception until 18 February 2020 to identify articles published in the English language that examined the prevalence of diagnostic testing overuse using database data. Each of the assessments was categorised as using a patient-indication lens, a patient-population lens or a service lens. RESULTS: 118 assessments of diagnostic testing overuse, extracted from 35 studies, were included in this study. Most included assessments used a patient-indication lens (n=67, 57%), followed by the service lens (n=27, 23%) and patient-population lens (n=24, 20%). Prevalence estimates of diagnostic testing overuse ranged from 0.09% to 97.5% (median prevalence of assessments using a patient-indication lens: 11.0%, patient-population lens: 2.0% and service lens: 30.7%). The majority of assessments (n=85) reported overuse of diagnostic testing to be below 25%. Overuse of diagnostic imaging tests was most often assessed (n=96). Among the 33 assessments reporting high levels of overuse (≥25%), preoperative testing (n=7) and imaging for uncomplicated low back pain (n=6) were most frequently examined. For assessments of similar diagnostic tests, major variation in the prevalence of overuse was observed. Differences in the definitions of low-value tests used, their operationalisation and assessment methods likely contributed to this observed variation. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that substantial overuse of diagnostic testing is present with wide variation in overuse. Preoperative testing and imaging for non-specific low back pain are the most frequently identified low-value diagnostic tests. Uniform definitions and assessments are required in order to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the magnitude of diagnostic testing overuse. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8685650 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86856502022-01-04 Overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review Müskens, Joris L J M Kool, Rudolf Bertijn van Dulmen, Simone A Westert, Gert P BMJ Qual Saf Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Overuse of diagnostic testing substantially contributes to healthcare expenses and potentially exposes patients to unnecessary harm. Our objective was to systematically identify and examine studies that assessed the prevalence of diagnostic testing overuse across healthcare settings to estimate the overall prevalence of low-value diagnostic overtesting. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science and Embase were searched from inception until 18 February 2020 to identify articles published in the English language that examined the prevalence of diagnostic testing overuse using database data. Each of the assessments was categorised as using a patient-indication lens, a patient-population lens or a service lens. RESULTS: 118 assessments of diagnostic testing overuse, extracted from 35 studies, were included in this study. Most included assessments used a patient-indication lens (n=67, 57%), followed by the service lens (n=27, 23%) and patient-population lens (n=24, 20%). Prevalence estimates of diagnostic testing overuse ranged from 0.09% to 97.5% (median prevalence of assessments using a patient-indication lens: 11.0%, patient-population lens: 2.0% and service lens: 30.7%). The majority of assessments (n=85) reported overuse of diagnostic testing to be below 25%. Overuse of diagnostic imaging tests was most often assessed (n=96). Among the 33 assessments reporting high levels of overuse (≥25%), preoperative testing (n=7) and imaging for uncomplicated low back pain (n=6) were most frequently examined. For assessments of similar diagnostic tests, major variation in the prevalence of overuse was observed. Differences in the definitions of low-value tests used, their operationalisation and assessment methods likely contributed to this observed variation. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that substantial overuse of diagnostic testing is present with wide variation in overuse. Preoperative testing and imaging for non-specific low back pain are the most frequently identified low-value diagnostic tests. Uniform definitions and assessments are required in order to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the magnitude of diagnostic testing overuse. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-01 2021-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8685650/ /pubmed/33972387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012576 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. 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 | Systematic Review Müskens, Joris L J M Kool, Rudolf Bertijn van Dulmen, Simone A Westert, Gert P Overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review |
title | Overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review |
title_full | Overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review |
title_short | Overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review |
title_sort | overuse of diagnostic testing in healthcare: a systematic review |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8685650/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33972387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2020-012576 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT muskensjorisljm overuseofdiagnostictestinginhealthcareasystematicreview AT koolrudolfbertijn overuseofdiagnostictestinginhealthcareasystematicreview AT vandulmensimonea overuseofdiagnostictestinginhealthcareasystematicreview AT westertgertp overuseofdiagnostictestinginhealthcareasystematicreview |