Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33980661›Full record

ArticleEmergency medicine journal : EMJ2022

Development and implementation of a clinician report to reduce unnecessary urine drug screen testing in the ED: a quality improvement initiative.

Jason Robert Vanstone, Shivani Patel, Michelle L Degelman, Ibrahim W Abubakari, Shawn McCann, Robert Parker, Terry Ross

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Emergency medicine journal : EMJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Jason Robert VanstoneStewardship and Clinical Appropriateness, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada jason.vanstone@saskhealthauthority.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8411-2664
Shivani PatelStewardship and Clinical Appropriateness, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Michelle L DegelmanStewardship and Clinical Appropriateness, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Ibrahim W AbubakariDigital Health, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Shawn McCanneHealth Saskatchewan, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Robert ParkerStewardship and Clinical Appropriateness, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Terry RossEmergency Medicine, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnnecessary testing is a problem-facing healthcare systems around the world striving to achieve sustainable care. Despite knowing this problem exists, clinicians continue to order tests that do not contribute to patient care. Using behavioural and implementation science can help address this problem. Locally, audit and feedback are used to provide information to clinicians about their performance on relevant metrics. However, this is often done without evidence-based methods to optimise uptake. Our objective was to improve the appropriate use of laboratory tests in the ED using evidence-based audit and feedback and behaviour change techniques.

methodsUsing the behaviour change wheel, we implemented an audit and feedback tool that provided information to ED physicians about their use of laboratory tests; specifically, we focused on education and review of the appropriate use of urine drug screen tests. The report was designed in collaboration with end users to help maximise engagement. Following development of the report, audit and feedback sessions were delivered over an 18-month period.

resultsData on urine drug screen testing were collected continually throughout the intervention period and showed a sustained decrease among ED physicians. Test use dropped from a monthly departmental average of 26 urine drug screen tests per 1000 patient visits to only eight tests per 1000 patient visits following the initiation of the audit and feedback intervention.

conclusionAudit and feedback reduced unnecessary urine drug screen testing in the ED. Regular feedback sessions continuously engaged physicians in the audit and feedback intervention and allowed the implementation team to react to changing priorities and feedback from the clinical group. It was important to include the end users in the design of audit and feedback tools to maximise physician engagement. Inclusion in this process can help ensure physicians adopt a sense of ownership regarding which metrics to review and provides a key component for the motivation aspect of behaviour change. Departmental leadership is also critical to the process of implementing a successful audit and feedback initiative and achieving sustained behaviour change.

Indexed as

PhysiciansQuality ImprovementDelivery of Health CareFeedbackHumansLeadershipauditemergency departmentquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID33980661
PMCPMC9132872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.