Implementation of 'Choosing Wisely Netherlands' for internal medicine.

4区 医学 Q3 Medicine Netherlands Journal of Medicine Pub Date : 2020-12-01
B J Laan, A A van de Woestijne, H A H Kaasjager, S E Geerlings
{"title":"Implementation of 'Choosing Wisely Netherlands' for internal medicine.","authors":"B J Laan,&nbsp;A A van de Woestijne,&nbsp;H A H Kaasjager,&nbsp;S E Geerlings","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Choosing Wisely campaign aims to reduce low-value care to improve quality and lower healthcare costs. Our objective was to determine the current implementation of the Choosing Wisely Netherlands campaign and the 10 recommendations (released in 2014) for internal medicine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We actively surveyed physicians and residents in the departments of internal medicine in 13 hospitals in the Netherlands. The survey was performed during a presentation about Choosing Wisely and we asked whether they thought that the recommendations were implemented.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between May and November 2018, we surveyed 281 physicians and residents, of which we received 2625 answers (response rate 85%). We found that 178 (68.5%) of 260 physicians were unaware of the Choosing Wisely campaign. For the implementation of recommendations, 1506 (75.2%) of 2003 answers stated that physicians applied the recommendations in clinical practice. We found no differences in implementation of physicians who were aware or unaware of the campaign, respectively 529 (76.1%) of 695 versus 854 (74.2%) of 1151 of the recommendations were implemented; p = 0.357. The recommendation that was implemented least was 'Do not routinely order coagulation tests before invasive procedures', in which 28% stated that they applied this in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Four years after the introduction, only one-third of physicians and residents of internal medicine were aware of the Choosing Wisely Netherlands campaign. Nevertheless, most Choosing Wisely recommendations were implemented sufficiently in clinical practice. There is room for improvement, mainly in recommendations that need a multidisciplinary approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":18918,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Journal of Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Netherlands Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Choosing Wisely campaign aims to reduce low-value care to improve quality and lower healthcare costs. Our objective was to determine the current implementation of the Choosing Wisely Netherlands campaign and the 10 recommendations (released in 2014) for internal medicine.

Methods: We actively surveyed physicians and residents in the departments of internal medicine in 13 hospitals in the Netherlands. The survey was performed during a presentation about Choosing Wisely and we asked whether they thought that the recommendations were implemented.

Results: Between May and November 2018, we surveyed 281 physicians and residents, of which we received 2625 answers (response rate 85%). We found that 178 (68.5%) of 260 physicians were unaware of the Choosing Wisely campaign. For the implementation of recommendations, 1506 (75.2%) of 2003 answers stated that physicians applied the recommendations in clinical practice. We found no differences in implementation of physicians who were aware or unaware of the campaign, respectively 529 (76.1%) of 695 versus 854 (74.2%) of 1151 of the recommendations were implemented; p = 0.357. The recommendation that was implemented least was 'Do not routinely order coagulation tests before invasive procedures', in which 28% stated that they applied this in clinical practice.

Conclusion: Four years after the introduction, only one-third of physicians and residents of internal medicine were aware of the Choosing Wisely Netherlands campaign. Nevertheless, most Choosing Wisely recommendations were implemented sufficiently in clinical practice. There is room for improvement, mainly in recommendations that need a multidisciplinary approach.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在内科领域实施“明智选择荷兰”。
背景:明智选择运动旨在减少低价值护理,以提高质量和降低医疗成本。我们的目标是确定“明智选择荷兰”运动和内科医学10项建议(2014年发布)的当前实施情况。方法:我们对荷兰13家医院的内科医生和住院医师进行了积极调查。这项调查是在一次关于明智选择的演讲中进行的,我们询问他们是否认为这些建议得到了实施。结果:2018年5月至11月,我们共对281名医生和住院医师进行了问卷调查,收到2625份问卷,回复率85%。我们发现260名医生中有178名(68.5%)不知道明智选择活动。对于建议的实施,2003个回答中有1506个(75.2%)表示医生在临床实践中应用了建议。我们发现了解或不了解该运动的医生在实施方面没有差异,695条建议中分别有529条(76.1%)和1151条建议中有854条(74.2%)得到了实施;P = 0.357。实施最少的建议是“在侵入性手术前不要常规安排凝血试验”,其中28%的人表示他们在临床实践中应用了这一建议。结论:引入四年后,只有三分之一的内科医生和住院医师知道明智地选择荷兰运动。然而,大多数明智选择的建议在临床实践中得到了充分的实施。还有改进的余地,主要是在需要多学科方法的建议方面。
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
Netherlands Journal of Medicine
Netherlands Journal of Medicine 医学-医学:内科
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Netherlands Journal of Medicine publishes papers in all relevant fields of internal medicine. In addition to reports of original clinical and experimental studies, reviews on topics of interest or importance, case reports, book reviews and letters to the editor are welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Hypotonic polyuria: at the cross-roads of copeptin. Severe acute respiratory infections surveillance for early signals in the community. Implementation of 'Choosing Wisely Netherlands' for internal medicine. Doppler follow-up after TIPS placement is not routinely indicated. A 16-years single centre experience. A healthcare failure mode and effect analysis to optimise the process of blood culture performance.
×
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