Dataset Information

Active change interventions to de-implement low-value healthcare practices: a scoping review protocol.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:There is recognition that the overuse of procedures, tests and medications strains the healthcare system financially and can cause unnecessary stress and harm to patients. In recent years, several initiatives have targeted the reduction or elimination of low-value practices in healthcare. Research suggests that passive interventions, such as the publication of guidelines, are often not sufficient to change behaviour and that active change interventions - interventions which actively implement strategies to change practices - are required to effect significant, sustained practice change. The purpose of this scoping review is to identify and characterise studies of active change interventions designed to reduce or eliminate low-value healthcare practices. METHODS:We will conduct a review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Scopus databases from inception. Building on previous research, 40 key terms will be used to search literature. The screening process will be conducted separately by two researchers, with discrepancies resolved by a third. Empirical studies of active change interventions used to reduce or eliminate low-value practices will be included. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis will be used to categorise the characteristics of the studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethics approval is not required for this study. This scoping review will provide insights into the impact of several characteristics of active change interventions, including the number of interventions (single-faceted or multifaceted) and the level of implementation (individual or organisational). These results can provide guidance and direction for future research in de-implementation. The results will be disseminated through presentations at national and international conferences and the publication of a manuscript.

SUBMITTER: Parker G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6475168 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Active change interventions to de-implement low-value healthcare practices: a scoping review protocol.

Parker Gillian G Rappon Tim T Berta Whitney W

BMJ open 20190323 3

<h4>Background</h4>There is recognition that the overuse of procedures, tests and medications strains the healthcare system financially and can cause unnecessary stress and harm to patients. In recent years, several initiatives have targeted the reduction or elimination of low-value practices in healthcare. Research suggests that passive interventions, such as the publication of guidelines, are often not sufficient to change behaviour and that active change interventions - interventions which ac ...[more]

PMID: 30904878

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesPotentially harmful nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) utilization persists at undesirable rates throughout the world. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings and to suggest directions for future research.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar (2000-2022).Study selectionStudies reporting on the effectiveness of interventions to systematically reduce potentially harmful NSAID utilization in healthcare settings.Data extractionUsing Covidence systematic review software, we extracted study and intervention characteristics, including the effectiveness of interventions in reducing NSAID utilization.ResultsFrom 7,818 articles initially identified, 68 were included in the review. Most studies took place in European countries (45.6%) or the U.S. (35.3%), with randomized controlled trial as the most common design (55.9%). The majority of studies (76.2%) reported a reduction in the utilization of potentially harmful NSAIDs. Interventions were largely clinician-facing (76.2%) and delivered in primary care (60.2%). Academic detailing, clinical decision support or electronic medical record interventions, performance reports, and pharmacist review were frequent approaches employed. NSAID use was most commonly classified as potentially harmful based on patients' age (55.8%) or history of gastrointestinal disorders (47.1%) or kidney disease (38.2%). Only 7.4% of interventions focused on over-the-counter NSAIDs in addition to prescription. Few studies (5.9%) evaluated pain or quality of life following NSAIDs discontinuation.ConclusionMany varied interventions are effective in de-implementing potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings. Efforts to adapt, scale, and disseminate these interventions are needed. In addition, future interventions should address over-the-counter NSAIDs, which are broadly available and widely used. Evaluating unintended consequences of interventions, including patient-focused outcomes, is another important priority. What is already known on this topic - NSAIDs are overutilized by high-risk patients at persistent rates. Interventions to reduce potentially harmful NSAIDs prescribing and over-the-counter (OTC) NSAIDs use are needed . What this study adds - More than 50 studies published internationally from 2000 to 2022 (three quarters of those reviewed) reported on interventions effective in de-implementing potentially harmful NSAIDs. We extracted and summarized characteristics of studies and of interventions to identify research gaps and priorities for future research . How this study might affect research, practice or policy - In light of the large number of effective interventions on record, implementation and dissemination efforts should be the priority of future work .

Project description:IntroductionDigital health interventions (DHIs) are defined as health services delivered electronically through formal or informal care. DHIs can range from electronic medical records used by providers to mobile health apps used by consumers. DHIs involve complex interactions between user, technology and the healthcare team, posing challenges for implementation and evaluation. Theoretical or interpretive frameworks are crucial in providing researchers guidance and clarity on implementation or evaluation approaches; however, there is a lack of standardisation on which frameworks to use in which contexts. Our goal is to conduct a scoping review to identify frameworks to guide the implementation or evaluation of DHIs.Methods and analysisA scoping review will be conducted using methods outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers' manual and will conform to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. Studies will be included if they report on frameworks (ie, theoretical, interpretive, developmental) that are used to guide either implementation or evaluation of DHIs. Electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsychINFO will be searched in addition to grey literature and reference lists of included studies. Citations and full text articles will be screened independently in Covidence after a reliability check among reviewers. We will use qualitative description to summarise findings and focus on how research objectives and type of DHIs are aligned with the frameworks used.Ethics and disseminationWe engaged an advisory panel of digital health knowledge users to provide input at strategic stages of the scoping review to enhance the relevance of findings and inform dissemination activities. Specifically, they will provide feedback on the eligibility criteria, data abstraction elements, interpretation of findings and assist in developing key messages for dissemination. This study does not require ethical review. Findings from review will support decision making when selecting appropriate frameworks to guide the implementation or evaluation of DHIs.

Project description:BackgroundNumerous models, tools and frameworks have been produced to improve the sustainability of evidence-based interventions. Due to the vast number available, choosing the most appropriate one is increasingly difficult for researchers and practitioners. To understand the value of such approaches, evidence warranting their use is needed. However, there is limited understanding of how sustainability approaches have been used and how they have impacted research or practice. This review aims to consolidate evidence on the application and impact of sustainability approaches in healthcare settings.MethodsA systematic scoping review was designed to search for peer-reviewed publications detailing the use of sustainability approaches in practice. A 5-stage framework for scoping reviews directed the search strategy, and quality assessment was performed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Searches were performed through electronic citation tracking and snowballing of references. Articles were obtained through Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar. Six outcome variables for sustainability were explored to ascertain impact of approaches.ResultsThis review includes 68 articles demonstrating the application of sustainability approaches in practice. Results show an increase in the use of sustainability approaches in peer-reviewed studies. Approaches have been applied across a range of healthcare settings, including primary, secondary, tertiary and community healthcare. Approaches are used for five main purposes, namely analysis, evaluation, guidance, assessment and planning. Results outline benefits (e.g. improved conceptualisation of sustainability constructs and improved ability to interpret sustainability data) and challenges (e.g. issues with approach constructs and difficulty in application) associated with using a sustainability approach in practice. Few articles (14/68) reported the sustainability outcome variables explored; therefore, the impact of approaches on sustainability remains unclear. Additional sustainability outcome variables reported in retrieved articles are discussed.ConclusionsThis review provides practitioners and researchers with a consolidated evidence base on sustainability approaches. Findings highlight the remaining gaps in the literature and emphasise the need for improved rigour and reporting of sustainability approaches in research studies. To guide future assessment and study of sustainability in healthcare settings an updated list of sustainability outcome variables is proposed.Trial registrationThis review was registered on the PROSPERO database CRD 42016040081 in June 2016.

Project description:BackgroundWatchful waiting management for acute otitis media (AOM), where an antibiotic is used only if the child's symptoms worsen or do not improve over the subsequent 2-3 days, is an effective approach to reduce antibiotic exposure for children with AOM. However, studies to compare the effectiveness of interventions to promote watchful waiting are lacking. The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness and implementation outcomes of two pragmatic, patient-centered interventions designed to facilitate use of watchful waiting in clinical practice.MethodsThis will be a cluster-randomized trial utilizing a hybrid implementation-effectiveness design. Thirty-three primary care or urgent care clinics will be randomized to one of two interventions: a health systems-level intervention alone or a health systems-level intervention combined with use of a shared decision-making aid. The health systems-level intervention will include engagement of a clinician champion at each clinic, changes to electronic health record antibiotic orders to facilitate delayed antibiotic prescriptions as part of a watchful waiting strategy, quarterly feedback reports detailing clinicians' use of watchful waiting individually and compared with peers, and virtual learning sessions for clinicians. The hybrid intervention will include the health systems-level intervention plus a shared decision-making aid designed to inform decision-making between parents and clinicians with best available evidence. The primary outcomes will be whether an antibiotic was ultimately taken by the child and parent satisfaction with their child's care. We will explore the differences in implementation effectiveness by patient population served, clinic type, clinical setting, and organization. The fidelity, acceptability, and perceived appropriateness of the interventions among different clinician types, patient populations, and clinical settings will be compared. We will also conduct formative qualitative interviews and surveys with clinicians and administrators, focus groups and surveys of parents of patients with AOM, and engagement of two stakeholder advisory councils to further inform the interventions.DiscussionThis study will compare the effectiveness of two pragmatic interventions to promote use of watchful waiting for children with AOM to reduce antibiotic exposure and increase parent satisfaction, thus informing national antibiotic stewardship policy development.Clinical trial registrationNCT06034080.

Project description:IntroductionKnowledge translation (KT also known as research utilisation, translational medicine and implementation science) is a dynamic and iterative process that includes the synthesis, dissemination, exchange and ethically sound application of knowledge to improve health. After the implementation of KT interventions, their impact on relevant outcomes should be monitored. The objectives of this scoping review are to: (1) conduct a systematic search of the literature to identify the impact on healthcare outcomes beyond 1 year, or beyond the termination of funding of the initiative of KT interventions targeting chronic disease management for end-users including patients, clinicians, public health officials, health services managers and policy-makers; (2) identify factors that influence sustainability of effective KT interventions; (3) identify how sustained change from KT interventions should be measured; and (4) develop a framework for assessing sustainability of KT interventions.Methods and analysisComprehensive searches of relevant electronic databases (eg, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), websites of funding agencies and websites of healthcare provider organisations will be conducted to identify relevant material. We will include experimental, quasi-experimental and observational studies providing information on the sustainability of KT interventions targeting chronic disease management in adults and focusing on end-users including patients, clinicians, public health officials, health services managers and policy-makers. Two reviewers will pilot-test the screening criteria and data abstraction form. They will then screen all citations, full articles and abstract data in duplicate independently. The results of the scoping review will be synthesised descriptively and used to develop a framework to assess the sustainability of KT interventions.Discussion and disseminationOur results will help inform end-users (ie, patients, clinicians, public health officials, health services managers and policy-makers) regarding the sustainability of KT interventions. Our dissemination plan includes publications, presentations, website posting and a stakeholder meeting.

Dataset Information

Active change interventions to de-implement low-value healthcare practices: a scoping review protocol.

Publications

Active change interventions to de-implement low-value healthcare practices: a scoping review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets