Use and De-implementation of Fecal Occult Blood Tests in the Acute Care Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES International Journal for Quality in Health Care Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI:10.1093/intqhc/mzae102
Rebekah O Russell, Alejandro C Arroliga, Nanette L Myers, Gerald O Ogola, Tresa McNeal, Niket Sonpal, Christian Cable, Valerie Danesh
{"title":"Use and De-implementation of Fecal Occult Blood Tests in the Acute Care Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Rebekah O Russell, Alejandro C Arroliga, Nanette L Myers, Gerald O Ogola, Tresa McNeal, Niket Sonpal, Christian Cable, Valerie Danesh","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To determine methods of FOBT de-implementation in acute care practice while summarizing the reasons and contraindications for inappropriate FOBT in acute care settings. Fecal occult blood testing is valuable for colorectal cancer screening in ambulatory settings but is not valuable for diagnostics in acute care with consistent indications for discontinuation as a tradition-based practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included all English language prospective and retrospective evaluation studies of FOBT use in acute care settings with or without de-implementation interventions and published as original research articles in peer-reviewed journals. A meta-analysis of FOBT positivity was conducted using a random effects model. Quality was assessed using Critical Appraisals Skills Programme criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 2,471 abstract/titles screened, 157 full-text articles were reviewed, and 22 articles met inclusion criteria of measuring prevalence or de-implementation of FOBT use in acute care settings. All 22 studies evaluated either FOBT use or de-implementation. Twenty articles reported FOBT positivity, with some illustrating that FOBT results were inconsequential to subsequent endoscopy decisions (n=7, 32%). The included studies represent a publication date range spanning 32 years, with limited documentation of de-implementation strategies. Four published studies described system-level disinvestment to administratively eliminate access to inpatient FOBT orders.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, all studies endorsed that the use of FOBTs in acute care settings results in increased workload and/or cost without diagnostic benefit. Critical appraisal of low-value tradition-based practices such as FOBT use in acute care settings are essential for deploying deliberate and effective de-implementation strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae102","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To determine methods of FOBT de-implementation in acute care practice while summarizing the reasons and contraindications for inappropriate FOBT in acute care settings. Fecal occult blood testing is valuable for colorectal cancer screening in ambulatory settings but is not valuable for diagnostics in acute care with consistent indications for discontinuation as a tradition-based practice.

Methods: We included all English language prospective and retrospective evaluation studies of FOBT use in acute care settings with or without de-implementation interventions and published as original research articles in peer-reviewed journals. A meta-analysis of FOBT positivity was conducted using a random effects model. Quality was assessed using Critical Appraisals Skills Programme criteria.

Results: Of 2,471 abstract/titles screened, 157 full-text articles were reviewed, and 22 articles met inclusion criteria of measuring prevalence or de-implementation of FOBT use in acute care settings. All 22 studies evaluated either FOBT use or de-implementation. Twenty articles reported FOBT positivity, with some illustrating that FOBT results were inconsequential to subsequent endoscopy decisions (n=7, 32%). The included studies represent a publication date range spanning 32 years, with limited documentation of de-implementation strategies. Four published studies described system-level disinvestment to administratively eliminate access to inpatient FOBT orders.

Conclusion: Overall, all studies endorsed that the use of FOBTs in acute care settings results in increased workload and/or cost without diagnostic benefit. Critical appraisal of low-value tradition-based practices such as FOBT use in acute care settings are essential for deploying deliberate and effective de-implementation strategies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
急症护理环境中粪便隐血试验的使用和取消:系统回顾与元分析》。
背景:确定在急症护理实践中取消粪便潜血试验的方法,同时总结急症护理环境中不适当进行粪便潜血试验的原因和禁忌症。粪便潜血试验在门诊环境中对结肠直肠癌筛查很有价值,但在急症护理诊断中却没有价值,而且作为一种基于传统的做法,停用粪便潜血试验的指征是一致的:我们纳入了所有关于在急诊护理环境中使用粪便隐血试验的前瞻性和回顾性评估研究,无论是否采取了取消实施的干预措施,这些研究均以原创研究文章的形式发表在同行评审期刊上。采用随机效应模型对 FOBT 阳性率进行了荟萃分析。研究质量采用 "批判性评价技能计划 "标准进行评估:在筛选出的 2,471 篇摘要/标题中,对 157 篇全文文章进行了审查,有 22 篇文章符合纳入标准,即衡量了急诊护理环境中 FOBT 的使用普及率或停止使用情况。所有 22 篇研究都对 FOBT 的使用或停用情况进行了评估。有 20 篇文章报告了 FOBT 阳性结果,其中一些文章说明了 FOBT 结果对随后的内镜检查决定并无影响(7 篇,32%)。所纳入的研究发表日期跨度长达 32 年,关于取消实施策略的文献有限。四项已发表的研究描述了系统层面的撤消投资,以在行政上取消住院病人的 FOBT 订单:总体而言,所有研究都认可在急症护理环境中使用输卵管造影检查会增加工作量和/或成本,但却没有诊断上的益处。对基于传统的低价值实践(如在急症护理环境中使用输卵管造影检查)进行严格评估,对于部署深思熟虑且有效的取消实施策略至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.80%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Quality in Health Care makes activities and research related to quality and safety in health care available to a worldwide readership. The Journal publishes papers in all disciplines related to the quality and safety of health care, including health services research, health care evaluation, technology assessment, health economics, utilization review, cost containment, and nursing care research, as well as clinical research related to quality of care. This peer-reviewed journal is truly interdisciplinary and includes contributions from representatives of all health professions such as doctors, nurses, quality assurance professionals, managers, politicians, social workers, and therapists, as well as researchers from health-related backgrounds.
期刊最新文献
Diagnostic performance of a newly launched Canadian fast-track ultrasound clinic by rheumatologists for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis. Exploring the Development of Safety Culture among Physicians with Text Mining of Patient Safety Reports: A Retrospective Study. Optimizing Neurosurgery Clinic Operations: A Comparative Study of Interventions in Finland's Public Healthcare System. Setting Standards in Residential Aged Care: Identifying Achievable Benchmarks of Care for Long-term Aged Care Services. The Influence Mechanism Analysis of Family Doctor Team Effectiveness: A Mixed-method Approach.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1