Back to Search
Start Over
Strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care: a systematic review
- Source :
- British Journal of General Practice; e858; e865; 0960-1643; 701; 70; ~British Journal of General Practice~e858~e865~~~0960-1643~701~70~~
- Publication Year :
- 2020
-
Abstract
- Contains fulltext : 229502.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)<br />BACKGROUND: It is recognised that medical tests are overused in primary care; however, it is unclear how best to reduce their use. AIM: To identify which strategies are effective in reducing the use of low-value medical tests in primary care settings. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review. METHOD: The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Rx for Change were searched (January 1990 to November 2019) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care settings. Two reviewers selected eligible RCTs, extracted data, and assessed their risk of bias. RESULTS: Of the 16 RCTs included in the review, 11 reported a statistically significant reduction in the use of low-value medical tests. The median of the differences between the relative reductions in the intervention and control arms was 17% (interquartile range 12% to 24%). Strategies using reminders or audit/feedback showed larger reduction than those without these components (22% versus 14%, and 22% versus 13%, respectively) and patient-targeted strategies showed larger reductions than those not targeted at patients (51% versus 17%). Very few studies investigated the sustainability of the effect, adverse events, cost-effectiveness, or patient-reported outcomes related to reducing the use of low-value tests. CONCLUSION: This review indicates that it is possible to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care, especially by using multiple components including reminders, audit/feedback, and patient-targeted interventions. To implement these strategies widely in primary care settings, more research is needed not only to investigate their effectiveness, but also to examine adverse events, cost-effectiveness, and patient-reported outcomes.
Details
- Database :
- OAIster
- Journal :
- British Journal of General Practice; e858; e865; 0960-1643; 701; 70; ~British Journal of General Practice~e858~e865~~~0960-1643~701~70~~
- Publication Type :
- Electronic Resource
- Accession number :
- edsoai.on1367162707
- Document Type :
- Electronic Resource