Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Background Low-value use of laboratory tests is a global challenge. Our objective was to evaluate an intervention bundle to reduce repetitive use of routine laboratory testing in hospitalised patients.
Methods We used a stepped-wedge design to implement an intervention bundle across eight medical units. Our intervention included educational tools and social comparison reports followed by peer-facilitated report discussion sessions. The study spanned October 2020–June 2021, divided into control, feasibility testing, intervention and a follow-up period. The primary outcomes were the number and costs of routine laboratory tests ordered per patient-day. We used generalised linear mixed models, and analyses were by intention to treat.
Results We included a total of 125 854 patient-days. Patient groups were similar in age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index and length of stay during the control, intervention and follow-up periods. From the control to the follow-up period, there was a 14% (incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92) overall reduction in ordering of routine tests with the intervention, along with a 14% (β coefficient=−0.14, 95% CI −0.07 to –0.21) reduction in costs of routine testing. This amounted to a total cost savings of $C1.15 per patient-day. There was also a 15% (IRR=0.85, 95% CI 0.79, 0.92) reduction in ordering of all common tests with the intervention and a 20% (IRR=1.20, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.30) increase in routine test-free patient-days. No worsening was noted in patient safety endpoints with the intervention.
Conclusions A multifaceted intervention bundle using education and facilitated multilevel social comparison was associated with a safe and effective reduction in use of routine daily laboratory testing in hospitals. Further research is needed to understand how system-level interventions may increase this effect and which intervention elements are necessary to sustain results.
- Audit and feedback
- Continuous quality improvement
- Continuing education, continuing professional development
- Healthcare quality improvement
- Hospital medicine
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request. All outcome data relevant to the study are available from Alberta Health Services Data and Analytics team upon request in accordance with institutional policies and procedures. All process measure data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
- Audit and feedback
- Continuous quality improvement
- Continuing education, continuing professional development
- Healthcare quality improvement
- Hospital medicine
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request. All outcome data relevant to the study are available from Alberta Health Services Data and Analytics team upon request in accordance with institutional policies and procedures. All process measure data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Footnotes
Twitter @aambasta1, @JuGirard5
Contributors AA designed and conceived the study and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. DW oversaw the study conduct and coordination. OO conducted all data analyses, guided by AA and PF. All coauthors contributed to the implementation and evaluation of study, critical review and redrafting of the manuscript into the final version. All authors consented to the publication of the final version of the manuscript. AA acts as the guarantor and accepts full responsibility for the work and/or the conduct of the study, had access to the data, and controlled the decision to publish.
Funding The funding body (Choosing Wisely Alberta) played no role in the design of the study; collection, analysis and interpretation of the data, and the decision to approve the publication of the finished article.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.