Avoiding low value care received increasing attention in many countries, as with the Choosing Wisely campaign and other initiatives to abandon care that wastes resources or delivers no benefit to patients. While an extensive literature characterises approaches to implementing evidence-based care, we have limited understanding of the process of de-implementation, such as abandoning existing low value practices. To learn more about the differences between implementation and de-implementation, we explored the literature and analysed data from two published studies (one implementation and one de-implementation) by the same orthopaedic surgeons. We defined ‘leaders’ as those orthopaedic surgeons who implemented, or de-implemented, the target processes of care and laggards as those who did not. Our findings suggest that leaders in implementation share some characteristics with leaders in de-implementation when comparing them with laggards, such as more open to new evidence, younger and less time in clinical practice. However, leaders in de-implementation and implementation differed in some other characteristics and were not the same persons. Thus, leading in implementation or de-implementation may depend to some degree on the type of intervention rather than entirely reflecting personal characteristics. De-implementation seemed to be hampered by motivational factors such as department priorities, and economic and political factors such as cost-benefit considerations in care delivery, whereas organisational factors were associated only with implementation. The only barrier or facilitator common to both implementation and de-implementation consisted of outcome expectancy (ie, the perceived net benefit to patients). Future studies need to test the hypotheses generated from this study and improve our understanding of differences between the processes of implementation and de-implementation in the people who are most likely to lead (or resist) these efforts.

Rationale and objectives: One way to understand medical overuse at the clinician level is in terms of clinical decision‐making processes that are normally adaptive but become maladaptive. In psychology, dual process models of cognition propose 2 decision‐making processes. Reflective cognition is a conscious process of evaluating options based on some combination of utility, risk, capabilities, and/or social influences. Automatic cognition is a largely unconscious process occurring in response to environmental or emotive cues based on previously learned, ingrained heuristics. De‐implementation strategies directed at clinicians may be conceptualized as corresponding to cognition: (1) a process of unlearning based on reflective cognition and (2) a process of substitution based on automatic cognition.Results: We define unlearning as a process in which clinicians consciously change their knowledge, beliefs, and intentions about an ineffective practice and alter their behaviour accordingly. Unlearning has been described as “the questioning of established knowledge, habits, beliefs and assumptions as a prerequisite to identifying inappropriate or obsolete knowledge underpinning and/or embedded in existing practices and routines.” We hypothesize that as an unintended consequence of unlearning strategies clinicians may experience “reactance,” ie, feel their professional prerogative is being violated and, consequently, increase their commitment to the ineffective practice.We define substitution as replacing the ineffective practice with one or more alternatives. A substitute is a specific alternative action or decision that either precludes the ineffective practice or makes it less likely to occur.Both approaches may work independently, eg, a substitute could displace an ineffective practice without changing clinicians' knowledge, and unlearning could occur even if no alternative exists. For some clinical practice, unlearning and substitution strategies may be most effectively used together.Conclusions: By taking into account the dual process model of cognition, we may be able to design de‐implementation strategies matched to clinicians' decision‐making processes and avoid unintended consequence.

Background: Inappropriate and wasteful use of health care resources is a common problem, constituting 10–34% of health services spending in the western world. Even though diagnostic imaging is vital for identifying correct diagnoses and administrating the right treatment, low-value imaging—in which the diagnostic test confers little to no clinical benefit—is common and contributes to inappropriate and wasteful use of health care resources. There is a lack of knowledge on the types and extent of low-value imaging. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to identify, characterize, and quantify the extent of low-value diagnostic imaging examinations for adults and children.Methods: A scoping review of the published literature was performed. Medline-Ovid, Embase-Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published from 2010 to September 2020. The search strategy was built from medical subject headings (Mesh) for Diagnostic imaging/Radiology OR Health service misuse/Medical overuse OR Procedures and Techniques Utilization/Facilities and Services Utilization. Articles in English, German, Dutch, Swedish, Danish, or Norwegian were included.Results: A total of 39,986 records were identified and, of these, 370 studies were included in the final synthesis. Eighty-four low-value imaging examinations were identified. Imaging of atraumatic pain, routine imaging in minor head injury, trauma, thrombosis, urolithiasis, after thoracic interventions, fracture follow-up and cancer staging/follow-up were the most frequently identified low-value imaging examinations. The proportion of low-value imaging varied between 2 and 100% inappropriate or unnecessary examinations.Conclusions: A comprehensive list of identified low-value radiological examinations for both adults and children are presented. Future research should focus on reasons for low-value imaging utilization and interventions to reduce the use of low-value imaging internationally.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO: CRD42020208072.

Research specifically addressing implementation strategies regarding nursing guidelines is limited. The objective of this review was to provide an overview of strategies used to implement nursing guidelines in all nursing fields, as well as the effects of these strategies on patient-related nursing outcomes and guideline adherence. Ideally, the findings would help guideline developers, healthcare professionals and organizations to implement nursing guidelines in practice. Systematic review. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018104615. We searched the Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL and Google Scholar databases until August 2019 as well as the reference lists of relevant articles. Studies were included that described quantitative data on the effect of implementation strategies and implementation outcomes of any type of a nursing guideline in any setting. No language or date of publication restriction was used. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care taxonomy was used to categorize the implementation strategies. Studies were classified as effective if a significant change in either patient-related nursing outcomes or guideline adherence was described. Strength of the evidence was evaluated using the 'Cochrane risk of bias tool' for controlled studies, and the 'Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment form' for cohort studies. A total of 54 articles regarding 53 different guideline implementation studies were included. Fifteen were (cluster) Randomized Controlled Trials or controlled before-after studies and 38 studies had a before-after design. The topics of the implemented guidelines were diverse, mostly concerning skin care (n = 9) and infection prevention (n = 7). Studies were predominantly performed in hospitals (n = 34) and nursing homes (n = 11). Thirty studies showed a positive significant effect in either patient-related nursing outcomes or guideline adherence (68%, n = 36). The median number of implementation strategies used was 6 (IQR 4-8) per study. Educational strategies were used in nearly all studies (98.1%, n = 52), followed by deployment of local opinion leaders (54.7%, n = 29) and audit and feedback (41.5%, n = 22). Twenty-three (43.4%) studies performed a barrier assessment, nineteen used tailored strategies. A wide variety of implementation strategies are used to implement nursing guidelines. Not one single strategy, or combination of strategies, can be linked directly to successful implementation of nursing guidelines. Overall, thirty-six studies (68%) reported a positive significant effect of the implementation of guidelines on patient-related nursing outcomes or guideline adherence. Future studies should use a standardized reporting checklist to ensure a detailed description of the used implementation strategies to increase reproducibility and understanding of outcomes.

Background: It is estimated that 20–50% of all radiological examinations are of low value. Many attempts have been made to reduce the use of low-value imaging. However, the comparative effectiveness of interventions to reduce low-value imaging is unclear. Thus, the objective of this systematic review was to provide an overview and evaluate the outcomes of interventions aimed at reducing low-value imaging. Methods: An electronic database search was completed in Medline – Ovid, Embase-Ovid, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for citations between 2010 and 2020. The search was built from medical subject headings for Diagnostic imaging/Radiology, Health service misuse or medical overuse, and Health planning. Keywords were used for the concept of reduction and avoidance. Reference lists of included articles were also hand-searched for relevant citations. Only articles written in English, German, Danish, Norwegian, Dutch, and Swedish were included. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to appraise the quality of the included articles. A narrative synthesis of the final included articles was completed. Results: The search identified 15,659 records. After abstract and full-text screening, 95 studies of varying quality were included in the final analysis, containing 45 studies found through hand-searching techniques. Both controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after studies, time series, chart reviews, and cohort studies were included. Most interventions were aimed at referring physicians. Clinical practice guidelines (n = 28) and education (n = 28) were most commonly evaluated interventions, either alone or in combination with other components. Multi-component interventions were often more effective than single-component interventions showing a reduction in the use of low-value imaging in 94 and 74% of the studies, respectively. The most addressed types of imaging were musculoskeletal (n = 26), neurological (n = 23) and vascular (n = 16) imaging. Seventy-seven studies reported reduced low-value imaging, while 3 studies reported an increase. Conclusions: Multi-component interventions that include education were often more effective than single-component interventions. The contextual and cultural factors in the health care systems seem to be vital for successful reduction of low-value imaging. Further research should focus on assessing the impact of the context in interventions reducing low-value imaging and how interventions can be adapted to different contexts.

Conservative oxygen therapy is aimed at the prevention of harm by iatrogenic hyperoxia while preserving adequate tissue oxygenation. Our aim was to study the effectiveness and clinical outcomes of a two-step implementation of conservative oxygenation targets in the ICU. This was a before and after stepwise implementation study of conservative oxygenation targets, between July 2011 and July 2014. The primary endpoint was the proportion of PaO2 values within the target range. Secondary outcomes included ventilator-free days at day 28, length of stay, and mortality. Three closed-format ICUs in the Netherlands. We analyzed data on 15,045 eligible admissions. The first implementation phase consisted of providing training and feedback on new guidelines instructing for explicit targets for arterial oxygen tension (PaO2, 55-86 mm Hg) and oxyhemoglobin saturation (SpO2, 92-95%). In the second phase, bedside clinicians were additionally assisted in guideline adherence by a computerized decision-support system. The proportion of PaO2 in the target range increased from 47% at baseline to 63% in phase 1 and to 68% in phase 2 (p < 0.0001). Episodes of hyperoxia decreased (p < 0.0001), whereas hypoxic episodes remained unchanged (p = 0.06) during the study. Mechanical ventilation time was significantly lower (p < 0.01) during both study phases. After adjustment for potential confounders, ventilator-free days in phase 1 and phase 2 were higher than baseline: adjusted mean difference, 0.55 (95% CI, 0.25-0.84) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.11-0.86), respectively. Adjusted ICU mortality and ICU-free days did not significantly differ between study phases. Hospital mortality decreased in reference to baseline: adjusted odds ratio, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.74-0.96) for phase 1 and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.69-0.96) for phase 2. Stepwise implementation of conservative oxygenation targets was feasible, effective, and seemed safe in critically ill patients. The implementation was associated with several changes in clinical outcomes, but the causal impact of conservative oxygenation is still to be determined.