Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32450898›Full record

SynthesisImplementation science : IS2020

Effects of de-implementation strategies aimed at reducing low-value nursing procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Tessa Rietbergen, Denise Spoon, Anja H Brunsveld-Reinders, Jan W Schoones, Anita Huis, Maud Heinen, Anke Persoon, Monique van Dijk, Hester Vermeulen, Erwin Ista and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Low-value and high-value care recommendations in nursing: A systematic assessment of clinical practice guidelines.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The Cost Utility of Nonpregnancy Laboratory Monitoring for Persons on Isotretinoin Acne Therapy.JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Tessa RietbergenDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Section Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Denise SpoonDepartment of Internal Medicine, Nursing Science, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Anja H Brunsveld-ReindersDepartment of Quality and Patient Safety, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jan W SchoonesLeiden University Medical Center, Walaeus Library, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Anita HuisDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Maud HeinenDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Anke PersoonDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Monique van DijkDepartment of Internal Medicine, Nursing Science, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Hester VermeulenDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Erwin IstaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Nursing Science, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Leti van Bodegom-VosDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Section Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. l.van_bodegom-vos@lumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-8486-6404
Leiden University Medical Center · NLErasmus MC · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLHAN University of Applied Sciences · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the last decade, there is an increasing focus on detecting and compiling lists of low-value nursing procedures. However, less is known about effective de-implementation strategies for these procedures. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to summarize the evidence of effective strategies to de-implement low-value nursing procedures.

methodsPubMed, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched till January 2020. Additionally, reference lists and citations of the included studies were searched. Studies were included that described de-implementation of low-value nursing procedures, i.e., procedures, test, or drug orders by nurses or nurse practitioners. PRISMA guideline was followed, and the 'Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care' (EPOC) taxonomy was used to categorize de-implementation strategies. A meta-analysis was performed for the volume of low-value nursing procedures in controlled studies, and Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (95% CI) were calculated using a random effects model.

resultsTwenty-seven studies were included in this review. Studies used a (cluster) randomized design (n = 10), controlled before-after design (n = 5), and an uncontrolled before-after design (n = 12). Low-value nursing procedures performed by nurses and/or nurse specialists that were found in this study were restraint use (n = 20), inappropriate antibiotic prescribing (n = 3), indwelling or unnecessary urinary catheters use (n = 2), ordering unnecessary liver function tests (n = 1), and unnecessary antipsychotic prescribing (n = 1). Fourteen studies showed a significant reduction in low-value nursing procedures. Thirteen of these 14 studies included an educational component within their de-implementation strategy. Twelve controlled studies were included in the meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses for study design showed no statistically significant subgroup effect for the volume of low-value nursing procedures (p = 0.20).

conclusionsThe majority of the studies with a positive significant effect used a de-implementation strategy with an educational component. Unfortunately, no conclusions can be drawn about which strategy is most effective for reducing low-value nursing care due to a high level of heterogeneity and a lack of studies. We recommend that future studies better report the effects of de-implementation strategies and perform a process evaluation to determine to which extent the strategy has been used.

trial registrationThe review is registered in Prospero (CRD42018105100).

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceEconomics, NursingEducation, Nursing, ContinuingHumansMedical OveruseNursingQuality Indicators, Health CareDe-implementationDeprescriptionHealth services MisuseInappropriate prescribingLow-value careNursing

Identifiers

PMID32450898
PMCPMC7249362
OpenAlexW3029847100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.