ArticleBMJ quality improvement reports2017
Choosing Wisely: A Quality Improvement Initiative to Decrease Unnecessary Preoperative Testing.
Article in BMJ quality improvement reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Choosing Wisely Interventions on Low-Value Medical Services: A Systematic Review.The Milbank quarterly · 2021Pooled it
- The role of electronic health records systems in de-implementing low-value care in primary care: a scoping review.Implementation science communications · 2025Review
- Effects of Virtually Led Value-Based Preoperative Assessment on Safety, Efficiency, and Patient and Professional Satisfaction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Multicomponent Deimplementation Strategy to Reduce Low-Value Preoperative Testing.JAMA surgery · 2025Article
- Implementing a closed loop clinical decision support system for sustainable preoperative care.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Integrating Choosing Wisely, Value-Based Care Principles, Into Undergraduate Medical Education: A Pilot Study.Cureus · 2024Article
- Identifying Strategies to Reduce Low-Value Preoperative Testing for Low-Risk Procedures: a Qualitative Study of Facilities with High or Recently Improved Levels of Testing.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Evaluation of an Intervention to Reduce Low-Value Preoperative Care for Patients Undergoing Cataract Surgery at a Safety-Net Health System.JAMA internal medicine · 2019Article
- Utility of routine laboratory preoperative tests based on previous results: Time to give up.Biochemia medica · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center is a rural, academic medical center in the northeastern United States; its General Internal Medicine (GIM) division performs about 900 low and intermediate surgical risk preoperative evaluations annually. Routine preoperative testing in these evaluations is widely considered a low-value service. Our baseline data sample showed unnecessary testing rates of approximately 36%. A multi-disciplinary team used a micro-systems approach to analyze the existing process and formulate a rapid cycle improvement strategy. Our improvement efforts focused on implementation of a Nurse Practitioner and Physician Assistant (Associate Provider) clinic to incorporate standardized protocols for preoperative assessment. Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles included creation of a dedicated Associate Provider run preoperative clinic, modifying and operationalizing a scheduling scheme, and creating and implementing Electronic Health Record (EHR) tools. We used Statistical Process Control (SPC) methods to analyze time ordered data for the usual care process and to compare performance with the novel preoperative clinic. The Associate Provider preoperative clinic showed unnecessary testing rates of 4% compared with 23% in the usual care cohort (p<.001) within 3 months of implementation. When testing rates across the entire division were analyzed, there was no significant change. In our GIM division this preoperative clinic was effectively staffed with Associate Providers. Dedicated leadership support, incorporating input from a diverse improvement team, and balancing innovation with other clinical needs are important elements for success. We hypothesize that protecting clinical time to focus on preoperative care, monitoring and modifying scheduling processes, and improving support for electronic health record tool implementation would have yielded further performance improvements. Our experience provides valuable learning for other primary care practices with similar challenges. Identifying appropriate patients for inclusion in these clinic visits while optimizing primary care provider collaboration are important future challenges.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.