Reducing Low-Value Care: A New Path to Better Health Outcomes

by Jon Scaccia September 3, 2024

In the fast-paced world of healthcare, where every decision can have a significant impact on patient outcomes and resource allocation, the concept of low-value care (LVC) has become increasingly important. LVC refers to medical practices that provide little to no benefit to patients and may even cause harm. These practices can drain healthcare resources and divert attention from more effective interventions. In recent years, there has been a growing movement to “de-implement” these practices—essentially, to stop using them. But how effective are these de-implementation strategies? A new study provides valuable insights into this question, revealing which strategies work best and why they matter.

What Is Low-Value Care and Why Does It Matter?

Imagine going to the doctor for a routine checkup, and without a clear reason, you’re given a test that has little chance of benefiting you. Maybe it’s a blood test that’s not indicated or an imaging scan that isn’t necessary. These types of medical interventions fall under the umbrella of LVC. While they may seem harmless, LVC practices can lead to overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and unnecessary stress for patients. They also consume a significant portion of healthcare resources that could be better spent elsewhere.

LVC is a global issue, with estimates suggesting that 12-15% of patients receive at least one inappropriate healthcare practice each year. So that’s a lot. Imagine not having to go for bloodwork or fast for 12 hours.

Reducing LVC is crucial not only for improving patient care but also for making healthcare systems more efficient and sustainable. However, eliminating established medical practices is easier said than done. This is where de-implementation strategies come into play.

What Are De-Implementation Strategies?

De-implementation is the process of systematically discontinuing low-value medical practices. It involves several approaches: stopping the practice entirely, replacing it with a more appropriate intervention, reducing its frequency or intensity, or restricting its use to specific settings or populations. These strategies are akin to reversing the implementation process but come with their own set of challenges.

For instance, healthcare providers may be accustomed to certain practices, or patients might expect specific tests or treatments. Therefore, successful de-implementation requires a well-thought-out strategy that considers the context, engages stakeholders, and adapts to the specific needs of the healthcare setting.

What the Study Found: Effective Strategies for De-Implementation

A recent overview of systematic reviews analyzed 46 studies to determine the effectiveness of various de-implementation strategies. The findings revealed that not all strategies are created equal, and some are more effective than others in reducing LVC practices.

1. Changing Infrastructure and Workflow: The Game Changer

One of the most effective strategies identified in the study is changing infrastructure and workflow. This approach involves restructuring the physical or administrative processes in healthcare settings to make it easier to discontinue LVC practices. For example, introducing point-of-care tests that help distinguish between viral and bacterial infections can reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions. Similarly, altering electronic health records to prompt clinicians to reconsider unnecessary tests can lead to significant reductions in LVC. This strategy is quality improvement 101.

This strategy works because it creates an environment where the desired behavior—avoiding LVC—is the path of least resistance. When the system is designed to support better decision-making, both clinicians and patients benefit.

2. Developing Stakeholder Relationships: Building Consensus

Another highly effective strategy is developing stakeholder relationships. This involves engaging healthcare providers, patients, and other stakeholders in the process of de-implementation. For instance, creating advisory boards, conducting local consensus discussions, and involving patients in shared decision-making can lead to a more widespread adoption of de-implementation initiatives.

This strategy recognizes that healthcare is a collaborative effort. When everyone involved understands the importance of reducing LVC and agrees on the best course of action, it becomes easier to implement changes. Moreover, involving patients in the decision-making process can reduce the demand for unnecessary treatments and tests, as they become more informed about what is truly beneficial for their health.

3. Tailoring Strategies to Context: One Size Does Not Fit All

The study also highlighted the importance of tailoring de-implementation strategies to the specific context of the healthcare setting. What works in a large urban hospital might not be as effective in a small rural clinic. Therefore, strategies need to be adapted to the local environment, taking into account the unique challenges and resources available.

For example, in settings where resources are limited, simple interventions like delayed prescriptions—where patients are asked to wait a few days before filling an antibiotic prescription to see if symptoms improve—can effectively reduce unnecessary antibiotic use. In contrast, more resource-intensive settings might benefit from implementing sophisticated electronic health record systems that provide real-time feedback to clinicians.

Why These Findings Matter

The findings from this study are significant because they provide a roadmap for healthcare providers and policymakers aiming to reduce LVC. By focusing on strategies that change infrastructure, build consensus among stakeholders, and tailor interventions to specific contexts, healthcare systems can make substantial progress in eliminating low-value practices.

Reducing LVC is not just about cutting costs; it’s about improving the quality of care. When low-value practices are eliminated, patients are less likely to undergo unnecessary procedures that could cause harm. This not only leads to better health outcomes but also helps build trust in the healthcare system.

Join the Conversation

Reducing low-value care is a journey that requires the involvement of everyone in the healthcare ecosystem. We’d love to hear from you:

• Have you ever experienced a situation where you felt a medical test or treatment was unnecessary? How did you handle it?
• What are your thoughts on the strategies mentioned in this article? Do you think they could work in your healthcare setting?

Share your experiences and insights in the comments below or join the conversation on social media using the hashtag #ReduceLVC.

Be Part of the Change – Get Weekly Updates!

Stay informed and connected. Subscribe for free and share this blog to make a difference in public health with others. If you liked this blog, please share it! Your referrals help This Week in Public Health reach new readers.