1. Choosing Wisely: An idea worth sustaining
- Author
-
Kastner, Monika, Makarski, Julie, Mossman, Kathryn, Harris, Kegan, Hayden, Leigh, Giraldo, Manuel, Sharma, Deepak, Asalya, Marwan, Jussaume, Linda, Eisen, David, Wintemute, Kimberly, Rolko, Edith, Shin, Phil, Zadravec, Jennifer, and McRitchie, Donna
- Subjects
Medical care -- Utilization -- Quality management ,Business ,Health care industry - Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the sustainability potential of Choosing Wisely (CW) to address unnecessary medical care at Ontario community hospitals. Data Sources/Study Setting: Ontario community hospitals and their affiliated family health teams (FHTs). Study Design: A mixed-methods study involving the administration of a validated sustainability survey to CW implementation teams followed by their participation in focus groups. Data Collection/Extraction Methods: Survey data were collected using an Excel file with an embedded, automated scoring system. We collated individual survey scores and generated aggregate team scores. We also performed descriptive statistics for quantitative data (frequencies, means). Qualitative data were triangulated with quantitative assessments to support data interpretations using the meta-matrix method. Principal Findings: Fifteen CW implementation teams across four Ontario community hospitals and six affiliated primary care FHTs participated. CW priority areas investigated were de-prescribing of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and reducing Pre-Op testing and BUN/Urea lab testing. Survey results showed steady improvements in sustainability scores from baseline to final follow-up among most implementation teams: 10% increase for PPI de-prescribing (six FHTs) and 2% increase (three hospital teams); 18% increase in BUN/Urea lab testing (three hospital teams). Regardless of site or CW priority area, common facilitators were fit with existing processes and workflows, leadership support, and optimized team communication; common challenges were lack of awareness and buy-in, leadership engagement or a champion, and lack of fit with existing workflow and culture. All teams identified at least one challenge for which they co-designed and implemented a plan to maximize the sustainability potential of their CW initiative. Conclusions: Evaluating the sustainability potential of an innovation such as Choosing Wisely is critical to ensuring that they have the best potential for impact. Our work highlights that implementation teams can be empowered to influence implementation efforts and to realize positive outcomes for their health care services and patients. KEYWORDS implementation, mixed-methods, sustainability What is known on this topic * Choosing Wisely is a de-implementation innovation aimed at reducing unnecessary tests and low-value care that are unlikely to benefit patients or which may even cause harm. * Evaluating the long-term sustainability of innovations, such as Choosing Wisely, is often lacking, and may lead to implementation failure, wasted resources, and poor patient outcomes. * The success of ongoing implementation of innovations is dependent on assessing their sustainability potential, which has the best potential to support sustained improvements in health care sen/ices and patient outcomes over time. What this study adds * Understanding the implementation context of target knowledge users, their environment, resources, and mechanisms of the implementation process are necessary for optimized sustainability of innovations. * Implementation teams can influence and optimize their implementation efforts through solutions-focused discussions whereby implementation challenges can be identified and addressed. * Sustainability assessments can be strengthened by using a sustainability model as a platform for change, using a repeated measurement strategy to allow for optimization of sustainability over time, and to include a maintenance strategy for long-term sustainability or until the change becomes part of routine care., 1 | BACKGROUND It is estimated that 30% of health care services, tests, treatments, and procedures are unnecessary and unlikely to benefit patients (1-3) and can also lead to patient [...]
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF