Using theories and frameworks to understand how to reduce low-value healthcare: a scoping review

Gillian Parker, Nida Shahid, Tim Rappon, Monika Kastner, Karen Born, Whitney Berta, Gillian Parker, Nida Shahid, Tim Rappon, Monika Kastner, Karen Born, Whitney Berta

Abstract

Background: There is recognition that the overuse of procedures, testing, and medications constitutes low-value care which strains the healthcare system and, in some circumstances, can cause unnecessary stress and harm for patients. Initiatives across dozens of countries have raised awareness about the harms of low-value care but have had mixed success and the levels of reductions realized have been modest. Similar to the complex drivers of implementation processes, there is a limited understanding of the individual and social behavioral aspects of de-implementation. While researchers have begun to use theory to elucidate the dynamics of de-implementation, the research remains largely atheoretical. The use of theory supports the understanding of how and why interventions succeed or fail and what key factors predict success. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and characterize the use of theoretical approaches used to understand and/or explain what influences efforts to reduce low-value care.

Methods: We conducted a review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Scopus databases from inception to June 2021. Building on previous research, 43 key terms were used to search the literature. The database searches identified 1998 unique articles for which titles and abstracts were screened for inclusion; 232 items were selected for full-text review.

Results: Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Over half of the included articles were published in the last 2 years. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was the most commonly used determinant framework (n = 22). Of studies that used classic theories, the majority used the Theory of Planned Behavior (n = 6). For implementation theories, Normalization Process Theory and COM-B were used (n = 7). Theories or frameworks were used primarily to identify determinants (n = 37) and inform data analysis (n = 31). Eleven types of low-value care were examined in the included studies, with prescribing practices (e.g., overuse, polypharmacy, and appropriate prescribing) targeted most frequently.

Conclusions: This scoping review provides a rigorous, comprehensive, and extensive synthesis of theoretical approaches used to understand and/or explain what factors influence efforts to reduce low-value care. The results of this review can provide direction and insight for future primary research to support de-implementation and the reduction of low-value care.

Keywords: De-adopt; De-implement; Framework; Low-value care; Scoping review; Theory.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA diagram of the article selection process
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Use of theory or framework
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Low-value care studied

References

    1. Paprica PA, Culyer AJ, Elshaug AG, Peffer J, Sandoval GA. From talk to action: policy stakeholders, appropriateness, and selective disinvestment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2015;31(4):236–240.
    1. Norton WE, Chambers DA. Unpacking the complexities of de-implementing inappropriate health interventions. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):1–7.
    1. Brownlee SM, Korenstein D. Better understanding the downsides of low value healthcare could reduce harm. BMJ. 2021;372:1–4.
    1. Health Quality Ontario . Spotlight on leaders of change. Implementing choosing wisely Canada recommendations in Ontario to improve quality of care. 2017.
    1. Berwick DM, Hackbarth AD. Eliminating waste in US health care. JAMA. 2012;307(14):1513–1516. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.362.
    1. Levinson W, Kallewaard M, Bhatia RS, Wolfson D, Shortt S, Kerr EA. ‘Choosing Wisely’: a growing international campaign. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015;24:167–174.
    1. Born KB, Levinson W. Choosing Wisely campaigns globally: a shared approach to tackling the problem of overuse in healthcare. J Gen Fam Med. 2019;20(1):9–12.
    1. Born K, Levinson W. Choosing Wisely: an international campaign to combat overuse. To the Point, The Commonwealth Fund. 2017.
    1. Gnjidic D, Elshaug AG. De-adoption and its 43 related terms: harmonizing low-value care terminology. BMC Med. 2015;13(1):273.
    1. Grimshaw JM, Patey AM, Kirkham KR, Hall A, Dowling SK, Rodondi N, Ellen M, Kool T, van Dulmen SA, Kerr EA, Linklater S. De-implementing wisely: developing the evidence base to reduce low-value care. BMJ Qual Saf. 2020;29(5):409–417.
    1. Norton WE, Chambers DA, Kramer BS. Conceptualizing de-implementation in cancer care delivery. J Clin Oncol. 2018;37(2):93–96.
    1. Niven DJ, Mrklas KJ, Holodinsky JK, Straus SE, Hemmelgarn BR, Jeffs LP, Stelfox HT. Towards understanding the de-adoption of low-value clinical practices: a scoping review. BMC Med. 2015;13(1):255.
    1. Prasad V, Ioannidis JP. Evidence-based de-implementation for contradicted, unproven, and aspiring healthcare practices. Implement Sci. 2014;9:1–5.
    1. Niven DJ, Leigh JP, Stelfox HT. Healthcare management forum. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications; 2016. Ethical considerations in the de-adoption of ineffective or harmful aspects of healthcare; pp. 214–217.
    1. Nilsen P, Ingvarsson S, Hasson H, von Thiele SU, Augustsson H. Theories, models, and frameworks for de-implementation of low-value care: a scoping review of the literature. Implement Res Pract. 2020;1:2633489520953762.
    1. Patey AM, Hurt CS, Grimshaw JM, Francis JJ. Changing behaviour ‘more or less’—do theories of behaviour inform strategies for implementation and de-implementation? A critical interpretive synthesis. Implement Sci. 2018;13(1):134.
    1. Prusaczyk B, Swindle T, Curran G. Defining and conceptualizing outcomes for de-implementation: key distinctions from implementation outcomes. Implement Sci Commun. 2020;1:1–0.
    1. Montini T, Graham ID. “Entrenched practices and other biases”: unpacking the historical, economic, professional, and social resistance to de-implementation. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):24.
    1. Davidoff F. On the undiffusion of established practices. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(5):809–811.
    1. Gunderman RB, Seidenwurm DJ. De-adoption and un-diffusion. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12(11):1162–1163.
    1. Powell AA, Bloomfield HE, Burgess DJ, Wilt TJ, Partin MR. A conceptual framework for understanding and reducing overuse by primary care providers. Med Care Res Rev. 2013;70(5):451–472.
    1. Voorn VM, Marang-van de Mheen PJ, van der Hout A, Hofstede SN, So-Osman C, van den Akker-van ME, Kaptein AA, Stijnen T, Koopman-van Gemert AW, Dahan A, Vlieland TP. The effectiveness of a de-implementation strategy to reduce low-value blood management techniques in primary hip and knee arthroplasty: a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):72.
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, Lawton R, Parker D, Walker A. Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. BMJ Qual Saf. 2005;14(1):26–33.
    1. Lorencatto F, Stanworth SJ, Gould NJ. Bridging the research to practice gap in transfusion: the need for a multidisciplinary and evidence-based approach. Transfusion. 2014;54(10pt2):2588–2592.
    1. Watson MC, Bond CM, Johnston M, Mearns K. Using human error theory to explore the supply of non-prescription medicines from community pharmacies. BMJ Qual Saf. 2006;15(4):244–250.
    1. Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015;10(1):53.
    1. Lau R, Stevenson F, Ong BN, Dziedzic K, Treweek S, Eldridge S, Everitt H, Kennedy A, Qureshi N, Rogers A, Peacock R. Achieving change in primary care—effectiveness of strategies for improving implementation of complex interventions: systematic review of reviews. BMJ Open. 2015;5(12):e009993.
    1. Squires JE, Sullivan K, Eccles MP, Worswick J, Grimshaw JM. Are multifaceted interventions more effective than single-component interventions in changing health-care professionals’ behaviours? An overview of systematic reviews. Implement Sci. 2014;9(1):152.
    1. Godin G, Bélanger-Gravel A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Healthcare professionals’ intentions and behaviours: a systematic review of studies based on social cognitive theories. Implement Sci. 2008;3(1):36.
    1. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.
    1. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5(1):1–9.
    1. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, Moher D, Peters MDJ, Horsley T, Weeks L, Hempel S, Akl EA, Chang C, McGowan J, Stewart L, Hartling L, Aldcroft A, Wilson MG, Garritty C, Lewin S, Godfrey CM, Macdonald MT, Langlois EV, Soares-Weiser K, Moriarty J, Clifford T, Tunçalp Ö, Straus SE. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–473. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850.
    1. Birken SA, Powell BJ, Shea CM, Haines ER, Kirk MA, Leeman J, Rohweder C, Damschroder L, Presseau J. Criteria for selecting implementation science theories and frameworks: results from an international survey. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):124.
    1. Alder S, Wuthrich A, Haddadin B, Donnelly S, Hannah EL, Stoddard G, Benuzillo J, Bateman K, Samore M. Community intervention model to reduce inappropriate antibiotic use. Am J Health Educ. 2010;41(1):20–28.
    1. Hruza HR, Velasquez T, Madaras-Kelly KJ, Fleming-Dutra KE, Samore MH, Butler JM. Evaluation of clinicians’ knowledge, attitudes, and planned behaviors related to an intervention to improve acute respiratory infection management. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2020;41(6):672–679.
    1. Broniatowski DA, Klein EY, May L, Martinez EM, Ware C, Reyna VF. Patients’ and clinicians’ perceptions of antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory infections in the acute care setting. Med Decis Making. 2018;38(5):547–561.
    1. Wanat M, Borek AJ, Atkins L, Sallis A, Ashiru-Oredope D, Beech E, Butler CC, Chadborn T, Hopkins S, Jones L, McNulty CA. Optimising interventions for catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) in primary, secondary and care home settings. Antibiotics. 2020;9(7):419.
    1. Graber CJ, Jones MM, Glassman PA, Weir C, Butler J, Nechodom K, Kay CL, Furman AE, Tran TT, Foltz C, Pollack LA. Taking an antibiotic time-out: utilization and usability of a self-stewardship time-out program for renewal of vancomycin and piperacillin-tazobactam. Hosp Pharm. 2015;50(11):1011–1024.
    1. Cullinan S, Fleming A, O’Mahony D, Ryan C, O’Sullivan D, Gallagher P, Byrne S. Doctors’ perspectives on the barriers to appropriate prescribing in older hospitalized patients: a qualitative study. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;79(5):860–869.
    1. Addis S, Holland-Hart D, Edwards A, Neal RD, Wood F. Implementing prudent healthcare in the NHS in Wales; what are the barriers and enablers for clinicians? J Eval Clin Pract. 2019;25(1):104–110.
    1. Grant A, Dreischulte T, Guthrie B. Process evaluation of the data-driven quality improvement in primary care (DQIP) trial: active and less active ingredients of a multi-component complex intervention to reduce high-risk primary care prescribing. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):4.
    1. Lin IB, Coffin J, O’Sullivan PB. Using theory to improve low back pain care in Australian Aboriginal primary care: a mixed method single cohort pilot study. BMC Fam Pract. 2016;17(1):44.
    1. Soleymani F, Rashidian A, Hosseini M, Dinarvand R, Kebriaeezade A, Abdollahi M. Effectiveness of audit and feedback in addressing over prescribing of antibiotics and injectable medicines in a middle-income country: an RCT. DARU J Pharmaceut Sci. 2019;27(1):101–109.
    1. Klein EY, Martinez EM, May L, Saheed M, Reyna V, Broniatowski DA. Categorical risk perception drives variability in antibiotic prescribing in the emergency department: a mixed methods observational study. J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32(10):1083–1089.
    1. Trumbo SP, Iams WT, Limper HM, Goggins K, Gibson J, Oliver LR, Leverenz DL, Samuels LR, Brady DW, Kripalani S. Deimplementation of routine chest X-rays in adult intensive care units. J Hosp Med. 2019;14(2):83–89.
    1. Biezen R, Roberts C, Buising K, Thursky K, Boyle D, Lau P, Clark M, Manski-Nankervis JA. How do general practitioners access guidelines and utilise electronic medical records to make clinical decisions on antibiotic use? Results from an Australian qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2019;9(8):e028329.
    1. Squires JE, Simard SN, Asad S, Stacey D, Graham ID, Coughlin M, Clemons M, Grimshaw JM, Zhang J, Caudrelier JM, Arnaout A. Exploring reasons for overuse of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in Canada. Curr Oncol. 2019;26(4):e439.
    1. Curran J, Brehaut J, Patey A, Osmond M, Stiell I, Grimshaw J. Understanding the Canadian adult CT head rule trial: use of the theoretical domains framework for process evaluation. Implement Sci. 2013;8:25.
    1. Kempen TG, Gillespie U, Färdborg M, McIntosh J, Mair A, Stewart D. A case study of the implementation and sustainability of medication reviews in older patients by clinical pharmacists. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(11):1309–1316.
    1. Santillo M, Sivyer K, Krusche A, Mowbray F, Jones N, Peto TE, Walker AS, Llewelyn MJ, Yardley L. Intervention planning for Antibiotic Review Kit (ARK): a digital and behavioural intervention to safely review and reduce antibiotic prescriptions in acute and general medicine. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019;74(11):3362–3370.
    1. Jenkins HJ, Moloney NA, French SD, Maher CG, Dear BF, Magnussen JS, Hancock MJ. Using behaviour change theory and preliminary testing to develop an implementation intervention to reduce imaging for low back pain. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):734.
    1. Haskell L, Tavender EJ, Wilson C, Babl FE, Oakley E, Sheridan N, Dalziel SR. Understanding factors that contribute to variations in bronchiolitis management in acute care settings: a qualitative study in Australia and New Zealand using the Theoretical Domains Framework. BMC Pediatr. 2020;20(1):1–2.
    1. Cadogan SL, McHugh SM, Bradley CP, Browne JP, Cahill MR. General practitioner views on the determinants of test ordering: a theory-based qualitative approach to the development of an intervention to improve immunoglobulin requests in primary care. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0465-8.
    1. Chambers A, MacFarlane S, Zvonar R, Evans G, Moore JE, Langford BJ, Augustin A, Cooper S, Quirk J, McCreight L, Garber G. A recipe for antimicrobial stewardship success: using intervention mapping to develop a program to reduce antibiotic overuse in long-term care. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2019;40(1):24–31.
    1. West LM, Cordina M. Educational intervention to enhance adherence to short-term use of antibiotics. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(2):193–201.
    1. Elouafkaoui P, Young L, Newlands R, Duncan EM, Elders A, Clarkson JE, Ramsay CR, Translation Research in a Dental Setting (TRiaDS) Research Methodology Group An audit and feedback intervention for reducing antibiotic prescribing in general dental practice: the RAPiD cluster randomised controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2016;13(8):e1002115.
    1. Desveaux L, Saragosa M, Rogers J, Bevan L, Loshak H, Moser A, Feldman S, Regier L, Jeffs L, Ivers NM. Improving the appropriateness of antipsychotic prescribing in nursing homes: a mixed-methods process evaluation of an academic detailing intervention. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):1–4.
    1. Korenvain C, MacKeigan LD, Dainty KN, Guilcher SJ, McCarthy LM. Exploring deprescribing opportunities for community pharmacists using the Behaviour Change Wheel. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2020;16(12):1746–1753.
    1. Hansen CR, Byrne S, O’Mahony D, Kearney PM, Sahm LJ. Qualitative analysis of community pharmacists’ opinions on their involvement in reducing potentially inappropriate prescribing. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;75(2):265–274.
    1. Byrne MK, Miellet S, McGlinn A, Fish J, Meedya S, Reynolds N, van Oijen AM. The drivers of antibiotic use and misuse: the development and investigation of a theory driven community measure. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1425.
    1. Banerjee SC, Siriwardena AN, Iqbal M. What influences pre-hospital cannulation intentions in paramedics? An application of the theory of reasoned action. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011;17(1):84–90.
    1. Barnes GD, Misirliyan S, Kaatz S, Jackson EA, Haymart B, Kline-Rogers E, Kozlowski J, Krol G, Froehlich JB, Sales A. Barriers and facilitators to reducing frequent laboratory testing for patients who are stable on warfarin: a mixed methods study of de-implementation in five anticoagulation clinics. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):87.
    1. Gupta DM, Boland RJ, Aron DC. The physician’s experience of changing clinical practice: a struggle to unlearn. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):28.
    1. Liu C, Liu C, Wang D, Deng Z, Tang Y, Zhang X. Determinants of antibiotic prescribing behaviors of primary care physicians in Hubei of China: a structural equation model based on the theory of planned behavior. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2019;8(1):23.
    1. Patey AM, Islam R, Francis JJ, Bryson GL, Grimshaw JM. Anesthesiologists’ and surgeons’ perceptions about routine pre-operative testing in low-risk patients: application of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify factors that influence physicians’ decisions to order pre-operative tests. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):52.
    1. Voorn VM, Marang-van de Mheen PJ, Wentink MM, Kaptein AA, Koopman-van Gemert AW, So-Osman C, Vliet Vlieland TP, Nelissen RG, van Bodegom-Vos L, LISBOA Study Group Perceived barriers among physicians for stopping non–cost-effective blood-saving measures in total hip and total knee arthroplasties. Transfusion. 2014;54(10pt2):2598–2607.
    1. Haskell L, Tavender EJ, Wilson CL, O’Brien S, Babl FE, Borland ML, et al. Effectiveness of targeted interventions on treatment of infants with bronchiolitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2021;175(8):797–806.
    1. Kane-Gill SL, Barreto EF, Bihorac A, Kellum JA. Development of a theory-informed behavior change intervention to reduce inappropriate prescribing of nephrotoxins and renally eliminated drugs. Ann Pharmacother. 2021;55(12):1474–1485.
    1. Litton E, Atkinson H, Anstey J, Anstey M, Campbell LT, Forbes A, et al. Optimising a targeted test reduction intervention for patients admitted to the intensive care unit: the targeted intensive care test ordering cluster trial intervention. Aust Crit Care. 2021;34(5):419–426.
    1. Høj K, Mygind A, Bro F. Exploring implementation processes in general practice in a feedback intervention aiming to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing: a qualitative study among general practitioners. Implement Sci Commun. 2021;2(1):1–2.
    1. Fitzpatrick ER, Pogorzelska-Maziarz M, Manning M, Gleason VM. The effect of an educational program on nursing knowledge and empowerment in antimicrobial stewardship in a surgical intensive care unit. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2021;40(1):21–28.
    1. Wolk CB, Schondelmeyer AC, Barg FK, Beidas R, Bettencourt A, Brady PW, Brent C, Eriksen W, Kinkler G, Landrigan CP, Neergaard R. Barriers and facilitators to guideline-adherent pulse oximetry use in bronchiolitis. J Hosp Med. 2021;16(1):23–30.
    1. Kuil SD, Schneeberger C, van Leth F, de Jong MD, Harting J. “A false sense of confidence” The perceived role of inflammatory point-of-care testing in managing urinary tract infections in Dutch nursing homes: a qualitative study. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20(1):1–0.
    1. Petrocchi S, Ludolph R, Labrie NH, Schulz P. Application of the theory of regulatory fit to promote adherence to evidence-based breast cancer screening recommendations: experimental versus longitudinal evidence. BMJ Open. 2020;10(11):e037748.
    1. Nielsen SB, Spalletta O, Toft Kristensen MA, Brodersen J. Psychosocial consequences of potential overdiagnosis in prostate cancer a qualitative interview study. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2020;38(4):439–446.
    1. Stefan MS, Spitzer KA, Zulfiqar S, Heineman BD, Hogan TP, Westafer LM, et al. Uncertainty as a critical determinant of antibiotic prescribing in patients with an asthma exacerbation: a qualitative study. J Asthma. 2020. 10.1080/02770903.2020.1847929.
    1. Macdonald C, Mazza D, Hickey M, Hunter M, Keogh LA, Investigators K, Jones SC, Saunders C, Nesci S, Milne RL, McLachlan SA. Motivators of inappropriate ovarian cancer screening: a survey of women and their clinicians. JNCI Cancer Spect. 2021;5(1):110.
    1. Fahim C, Bruhn WE, Albertini JG, Makary MA. A process evaluation of the improving wisely intervention: a peer-to-peer data intervention to reduce overuse in surgery. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):1–1.
    1. Backman C, Wooller KR, Hasimja-Saraqini D, Demery Varin M, Crick M, Cho-Young D, et al. Intervention to reduce unnecessary urinary catheter use in a large academic health science centre: a one-group, pretest, posttest study with a theory-based process evaluation. Nurs Open. 2021. 10.1002/nop2.920.
    1. Ailabouni NJ, Weir KR, Reeve E, Turner JT, Norton JW, Gray SL. Barriers and enablers of older adults initiating a deprescribing conversation. Patient Educ Couns. 2021. 10.1016/j.pec.2021.06.021.
    1. Harris C, Green S, Elshaug AG. Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 10: operationalising disinvestment in a conceptual framework for resource allocation. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):632.
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, Lawton R, Parker D, Walker A. Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14:26–33.
    1. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50.
    1. Flottorp SA, Oxman AD, Krause J, Musila NR, Wensing M, Godycki-Cwirko M, Baker R, Eccles MP. A checklist for identifying determinants of practice: a systematic review and synthesis of frameworks and taxonomies of factors that prevent or enable improvements in healthcare professional practice. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):1–1.
    1. Ajzen I. Attitudes, personality, and behavior. UK: McGraw-Hill Education; 2005.
    1. Fishbein M. A theory of reasoned action: some applications and implications. Nebr Symp Motiv. 1979;27:65–116.
    1. Reyna VF. A theory of medical decision making and health: fuzzy trace theory. Med Decis Making. 2008;28(6):850–865.
    1. Lewin K. Group decision and social change. Readings Soc Psychol. 1947;3:197–211.
    1. Wason PC, Evans JSB. Dual processes in reasoning? Cognition. 1974;3(2):141–154.
    1. Higgins ET. Making a good decision: value from fit. Am Psychol. 2000;55:1217–1230.
    1. Festinger L. A theory of cognitive dissonance. California: Stanford University Press; 1957.
    1. Kanter RM. Men and women of the corporation. 2. New York: Basic Books; 1993.
    1. May C, Finch T. Implementing, embedding, and integrating practices: an outline of normalization process theory. Sociology. 2009;43(3):535–554.
    1. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci. 2011;6:42.
    1. Choosing Wisely USA . History. 2018.
    1. Nilsen P, Roback K, Broström A, Ellström PE. Creatures of habit: accounting for the role of habit in implementation research on clinical behaviour change. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):53.
    1. Chamberlain CA, Martin RM, Busby J, Gilbert R, Cahill DJ, Hollingworth W. Trends in procedures for infertility and caesarean sections: was NICE disinvestment guidance implemented? NICE recommendation reminders. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):112.
    1. van Dulmen SA, Naaktgeboren CA, Heus P, Verkerk EW, Weenink J, Kool RB, Hooft L. Barriers and facilitators to reduce low-value care: a qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Open. 2020;10(10):e040025.
    1. Lasser EC, Pfoh ER, Chang HY, Chan KS, Bailey JC, Kharrazi H, Weiner JP, Dy SM. Has Choosing Wisely® affected rates of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry use? Osteoporos Int. 2016;27(7):2311–2316.
    1. Rosenberg A, Agiro A, Gottlieb M, Barron J, Brady P, Liu Y, Li C, DeVries A. Early trends among seven recommendations from the Choosing Wisely campaign. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(12):1913–1920.
    1. Parker G, Rappon T, Berta W. Active change interventions to de-implement low-value healthcare practices: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 2019;9(3):e027370.
    1. Kastner M, Makarski J, Mossman K, Harris K, Hayden L, Giraldo M, Sharma D, Asalya M, Jussaume L, Eisen D, Wintemute K. An idea worth sustaining: evaluation of the sustainability potential of Choosing Wisely across Ontario Community Hospitals and Family Health Teams. 2020.
    1. Morden NE, Colla CH, Sequist TD, Rosenthal MB. Choosing wisely—the politics and economics of labeling low-value services. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(7):589–592.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner