Search

Policy PointsDissemination of Choosing Wisely guidelines alone is unlikely to reduce the use of low‐value health services.Interventions by health systems to implement Choosing Wisely guidelines can reduce the use of low‐value services.Multicomponent interventions targeting clinicians are currently the most effective types of interventions. Context: Choosing Wisely aims to reduce the use of unnecessary, low‐value medical services through development of recommendations related to service utilization. Despite the creation and dissemination of these recommendations, evidence shows low‐value services are still prevalent. This paper synthesizes literature on interventions designed to reduce medical care identified as low value by Choosing Wisely and evaluates which intervention characteristics are most effective. Methods: We searched peer‐reviewed and gray literature from the inception of Choosing Wisely in 2012 through June 2019 to identify interventions in the United States motivated by or using Choosing Wisely recommendations. We also included studies measuring the impact of Choosing Wisely on its own, without interventions. We developed a coding guide and established coding agreement. We coded all included articles for types of services targeted, components of each intervention, results of the intervention, study type, and, where applicable, study quality. We measured the success rate of interventions, using chi‐squared tests or Wald tests to compare across interventions. Findings: We reviewed 131 articles. Eighty‐eight percent of interventions focused on clinicians only; 48% included multiple components. Compared with dissemination of Choosing Wisely recommendations only, active interventions were more likely to generate intended results (65% vs 13%, p < 0.001) and, among those, interventions with multiple components were more successful than those with one component (77% vs 47%, p = 0.002). The type of services targeted did not matter for success. Clinician‐based interventions were more effective than consumer‐based, though there is a dearth of studies on consumer‐based interventions. Only 17% of studies included a control arm. Conclusions: Interventions built on the Choosing Wisely recommendations can be effective at changing practice patterns to reduce the use of low‐value care. Interventions are more effective when targeting clinicians and using more than one component. There is a need for high‐quality studies that include active controls. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsIntegrated care is best understood as an emergent set of practices intrinsically shaped by contextual factors, and not as a single intervention to achieve predetermined outcomes.Policies to integrate care that facilitate person‐centered, relationship‐based care can potentially contribute to (but not determine) improved patient experiences.There can be an association between improved patient experiences and system benefits, but these outcomes of integrated care are of different orders and do not necessarily align.Policymakers should critically evaluate integrated care programs to identify and manage conflicts and tensions between a program's aims and the context in which it is being introduced. Context: Integrated care is a broad concept, used to describe a connected set of clinical, organizational, and policy changes aimed at improving service efficiency, patient experience, and outcomes. Despite examples of successful integrated care systems, evidence for consistent and reproducible benefits remains elusive. We sought to inform policy and practice by conducting a systematic hermeneutic review of literature covering integrated care strategies and concepts. Methods: We used an emergent search strategy to identify 71 sources that considered what integrated care means and/or tested models of integrated care. Our analysis entailed (1) comparison of strategies and concepts of integrated care, (2) tracing common story lines across multiple sources, (3) developing a taxonomy of literature, and (4) generating a novel interpretation of the heterogeneous strategies and concepts of integrated care. Findings: We identified four perspectives on integrated care: patients' perspectives, organizational strategies and policies, conceptual models, and theoretical and critical analysis. We subdivided the strategies into four framings of how integrated care manifests and is understood to effect change. Common across empirical and conceptual work was a concern with unity in the face of fragmentation as well as the development and application of similar methods to achieve this unity. However, integrated care programs did not necessarily lead to the changes intended in experiences and outcomes. We attribute this gap between expectations and results, in part, to significant misalignment between the aspiration for unity underpinning conceptual models on the one hand and the multiplicity of practical application of strategies to integrate care on the other. Conclusions: Those looking for universal answers to narrow questions about whether integrated care "works" are likely to remain disappointed. Models of integrated care need to be valued for their heuristic rather than predictive powers, and integration understood as emerging from particular as well as common contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsA large body of scientific work examines the mechanisms through which social determinants of health (SDOH) shape health inequities. However, the nuances described in the literature are infrequently reflected in the applied frameworks that inform health policy and programming.We synthesize extant SDOH research into a heuristic framework that provides policymakers, practitioners, and researchers with a customizable template for conceptualizing and operationalizing key mechanisms that represent intervention opportunities for mitigating the impact of harmful SDOH.In light of scarce existing SDOH mitigation strategies, the framework addresses an important research‐to‐practice translation gap and missed opportunity for advancing health equity. Context: The reduction of health inequities is a broad and interdisciplinary endeavor with implications for policy, research, and practice. Health inequities are most often understood as associated with the social determinants of health (SDOH). However, policy and programmatic frameworks for mitigation often rely on broad SDOH domains, without sufficient attention to the operating mechanisms, and effective SDOH mitigation strategies remain scarce. To expand the cadre of effective SDOH mitigation strategies, a practical, heuristic framework for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers is needed that serves as a roadmap for conceptualizing and targeting the key mechanisms of SDOH influence. Methods: We conduct a critical review of the extant conceptual and empirical SDOH literature to identify unifying principles of SDOH mechanisms and to synthesize an integrated framework for conceptualizing such mechanisms. Findings: We highlight eight unifying principles of SDOH mechanisms that emerge from landmark SDOH research. Building on these principles, we introduce and apply a conceptual model that synthesizes key SDOH mechanisms into one organizing, heuristic framework that provides policymakers, practitioners, and researchers with a customizable template for conceptualizing and operationalizing the key SDOH mechanisms that represent intervention opportunities to maximize potential impact for mitigating a given health inequity. Conclusions: Our synthesis of the extant SDOH research into a heuristic framework addresses a scarcity of peer‐reviewed organizing frameworks of SDOH mechanisms designed to inform practice. The framework represents a practical tool to facilitate the translation of scholarly SDOH work into evidence‐based and targeted policy and programming. Such tools designed to close the research‐to‐practice translation gap for effective SDOH mitigation are sorely needed, given that health inequities in the United States and in many other parts of the world have widened over the past two decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy PointsLow‐value care is common in clinical practice, leading to patient harm and wasted spending. Much of this low‐value care stems from the use of medical device‐based procedures.We describe here a novel academic‐policymaker collaboration in which evidence‐based clinical coverage for device‐based procedures is implemented through prior authorization‐based policies for Louisiana's Medicaid beneficiary population.This process involves eight steps: 1) identifying low‐value medical device‐based procedures based on clinical evidence review, 2) quantifying utilization and reimbursement, 3) reviewing clinical coverage policies to identify opportunities to align coverage with evidence, 4) using a low‐value device selection index, 5) developing an evidence synthesis and policy proposal, 6) stakeholder engagement and input, 7) policy implementation, and 8) policy evaluation. This strategy holds significant potential to reduce low‐value device‐based care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's views on his father's health and discusses his experience in hospital with doctors and social workers behavior. Topics discussed include cold treatment affect a poor family without knowledge of the health system; his meeting with medical director of a unique specialty hospital that provides palliative care for adult patients; and Medicare program benefits.