» Articles » PMID: 27539054

Are Low-value Care Measures Up to the Task? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Health Services
Date 2016 Aug 20
PMID 27539054
Citations 31
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Reducing low-value care is a core component of healthcare reforms in many Western countries. A comprehensive and sound set of low-value care measures is needed in order to monitor low-value care use in general and in provider-payer contracts. Our objective was to review the scientific literature on low-value care measurement, aiming to assess the scope and quality of current measures.

Methods: A systematic review was performed for the period 2010-2015. We assessed the scope of low-value care recommendations and measures by categorizing them according to the Classification of Health Care Functions. Additionally, we assessed the quality of the measures by 1) analysing their development process and the level of evidence underlying the measures, and 2) analysing the evidence regarding the validity of a selected subset of the measures.

Results: Our search yielded 292 potentially relevant articles. After screening, we selected 23 articles eligible for review. We obtained 115 low-value care measures, of which 87 were concentrated in the cure sector, 25 in prevention and 3 in long-term care. No measures were found in rehabilitative care and health promotion. We found 62 measures from articles that translated low-value care recommendations into measures, while 53 measures were previously developed by institutions as the National Quality Forum. Three measures were assigned the highest level of evidence, as they were underpinned by both guidelines and literature evidence. Our search yielded no information on coding/criterion validity and construct validity for the included measures. Despite this, most measures were already used in practice.

Conclusion: This systematic review provides insight into the current state of low-value care measures. It shows that more attention is needed for the evidential underpinning and quality of these measures. Clear information about the level of evidence and validity helps to identify measures that truly represent low-value care and are sufficiently qualified to fulfil their aims through quality monitoring and in innovative payer-provider contracts. This will contribute to creating and maintaining the support of providers, payers, policy makers and citizens, who are all aiming to improve value in health care.

Citing Articles

Monitoring low-value care in medical patients from Swiss university hospitals using a Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable (FAIR) national data stream and patient and public involvement: LUCID study protocol.

Guffi T, Ehrsam J, Debieux M, Rossel J, Crevier M, Reny J BMJ Open. 2024; 14(12):e089662.

PMID: 39732480 PMC: 11683918. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089662.


Validity of an Administrative Claims-Based Measure of Low-Value Carotid Revascularization.

Navarro M, Han J, Smith M, Casale P, Kini V J Am Heart Assoc. 2024; 13(4):e033022.

PMID: 38350869 PMC: 11010107. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.123.033022.


Development and validation of a new ICD-10-based screening colonoscopy overuse measure in a large integrated healthcare system: a retrospective observational study.

Adams M, Kerr E, Dominitz J, Gao Y, Yankey N, May F BMJ Qual Saf. 2022; 32(7):414-424.

PMID: 36192148 PMC: 10294020. DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2021-014236.


Managing the moral expansion of medicine.

Hofmann B BMC Med Ethics. 2022; 23(1):97.

PMID: 36138414 PMC: 9502962. DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00836-2.


National governance of de-implementation of low-value care: a qualitative study in Sweden.

Augustsson H, Casales Morici B, Hasson H, von Thiele Schwarz U, Schalling S, Ingvarsson S Health Res Policy Syst. 2022; 20(1):92.

PMID: 36050688 PMC: 9438133. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-022-00895-2.


References
1.
Rosenberg A, Agiro A, Gottlieb M, Barron J, Brady P, Liu Y . Early Trends Among Seven Recommendations From the Choosing Wisely Campaign. JAMA Intern Med. 2015; 175(12):1913-20. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.5441. View

2.
Mathias J, Feinglass J, Baker D . Variations in US hospital performance on imaging-use measures. Med Care. 2012; 50(9):808-14. DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31825a8c48. View

3.
Elshaug A, McWilliams J, Landon B . The value of low-value lists. JAMA. 2013; 309(8):775-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.828. View

4.
Rouster-Stevens K, Ardoin S, Cooper A, Becker M, Dragone L, Huttenlocher A . Choosing Wisely: the American College of Rheumatology's Top 5 for pediatric rheumatology. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014; 66(5):649-57. DOI: 10.1002/acr.22238. View

5.
Korenstein D, Falk R, Howell E, Bishop T, Keyhani S . Overuse of health care services in the United States: an understudied problem. Arch Intern Med. 2012; 172(2):171-8. DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.772. View