Temporal and geographical variations in diagnostic imaging in Norway.

BACKGROUND: Unwarranted temporal and geographical variations are acknowledged as a profound problem for equal access and justice in the provision of health services. Even more, they challenge the quality, safety, and efficiency of such services. This is highly relevant for imaging services. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the temporal and geographical variation in the number of diagnostic images in Norway from 2013 to 2021. METHODS: Data on outpatient imaging provided by the Norwegian Health Economics Administration (HELFO) and inpatient data afforded by fourteen hospital trusts and hospitals in Norway. Data include the total number of imaging examinations according to the Norwegian Classification of Radiological Procedures (NCRP). Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: More than 37 million examinations were performed in Norway during 2013-2021 giving an average of 4.2 million examinations per year. In 2021 there was performed and average of 0.8 examinations per person and 2.2 examinations per person for the age group > 80. There was a 9% increase in the total number of examinations from 2013 to 2015 and a small and stable decrease of 0.5% per year from 2015 to 2021 (with the exception of 2020 due to the pandemic). On average 71% of all examinations were outpatient examinations and 32% were conducted at private imaging centres. There were substantial variations between the health regions, with Region South-East having 53.1% more examinations per inhabitant than Region West. The geographical variation was even more outspoken when comparing catchment areas, where Oslo University Hospital Trust had twice as many examinations per inhabitant than Finnmark Hospital Trust. CONCLUSION: As the population in Norway is homogeneous it is difficult to attribute the variations to socio-economic or demographic factors. Unwarranted and supply-sensitive variations are challenging for healthcare systems where equal access and justice traditionally are core values.

Norwegian general practitioners' and radiologists' perspectives on the referral, justification, and unnecessary imaging-a survey.

AIM: This study aimed to survey general practitioners' (GPs) and radiologists' perspectives on referrals, imaging justification, and unnecessary imaging in Norway. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey covered access to imaging, responsibilities, attitudes toward justification assessment, referral process, and demographics using multiple choice questions, statements to report agreement with using the Likert scale and one open question. RESULTS: Forty radiologists and 58 GPs attending national conferences completed a web-based survey, with a 20/15% response rate, respectively. Both radiologists (97%) and GPs (100%) considered avoiding unnecessary examinations essential to their role in the healthcare service. Still, 91% of GPs admitted that they referred to imaging they thought was not helpful, while about 60% of the radiologists agreed that unnecessary imaging was conducted in their workplace. GPs reported pressure from patients and patients having private insurance as the most common reasons for doing unnecessary examinations. In contrast, radiologists reported a lack of clinical information and the inability to discuss patient cases with the GPs as the most common reasons. CONCLUSION: This study adds to our understanding of radiologists' and GPs' perspectives on unnecessary imaging and referrals. Better guidelines and, even more importantly, better communication between the referrer and the radiologist are needed. Addressing these issues can reduce unnecessary imaging and improve the quality and safety of care.

Low-value MRI of the knee in Norway: a register-based study to identify the proportion of potentially low-value MRIs and estimate the related costs.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to investigate the proportion of potentially low-value knee MRI in Norway and to provide an estimate of the related costs. DESIGN: Register study based on conditional data extraction and analysis of data from Control and Reimbursement of Healthcare Claims registry in Norway. SETTING: MRI in public specialist healthcare with universal health coverage (Norway). PARTICIPANTS: 48 212 MRIs for 41 456 unique patients and 45 946 reimbursement claims. OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of MRIs of the knee that (1) did not have a relevant tentative diagnosis prior to the knee MRI, (2) did not have a relevant alternative image of the knee before the MRI or (3) did not have a relevant code from the specialist care within 6 months after the MRI, and those that had combinations of 1, 2 and 3. Estimated costs for those that had combinations of 1, 2 and 3. RESULTS: Very few patients (6.4%) had a relevant diagnosis code or prior imaging examination when having the MRI and only 14.6% got a knee-related diagnosis code from the specialist care within 6 months after the MRI. 21.8% of the patients had knee X-ray, CT or ultrasound within 6 months before the MRI. Between 58% and 85% of patients having knee MRIs in Norway have no relevant examinations or diagnoses six months prior to or after the MRI examination. These examinations are unlikely to benefit patients and they correspond to between 24 108 and 35 416 MRIs at a cost of €6.7-€9.8 million per year. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of MRIs of the knee in Norway have no relevant examinations or diagnoses before or after the MRI and are potentially of low value. Reducing low-value MRIs could free resources for high-value imaging, reduce waiting times, improve the quality of care and increase patient safety and professional integrity.

Cost of Low-Value Imaging Worldwide: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Imaging with low or no benefit for the patient undermines the quality of care and amounts to vast opportunity costs. More than 3.6 billion imaging examinations are performed annually, and about 20-50% of these are of low value. This study aimed to synthesize knowledge of the costs of low-value imaging worldwide. METHODS: This systematic review was based on the PRISMA statement. The database search was developed in Medline and further adapted to Embase-Ovid, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Primary empirical studies assessing the costs of low-value diagnostic imaging were included if published between 2012 and March 2022. Studies designed as randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, descriptive studies, cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and mixed-methods studies were eligible. The analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: Of 5,567 records identified, 106 were included. Most of the studies included were conducted in the USA (n = 76), and a hospital or medical center was the most common setting (n = 82). Thirty-eight of the included studies calculated the costs of multiple imaging modalities; in studies with only one imaging modality included, conventional radiography was the most common (n = 32). Aggregated costs for low-value examinations amounts to billions of dollars per year globally. Initiatives to reduce low-value imaging may reduce costs by up to 95% without harming patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first systematic review of the cost of low-value imaging worldwide, documenting a high potential for cost reduction. Given the universal challenges with resource allocation, the large amount used for low-value imaging represents a vast opportunity cost and offers great potential to improve the quality and efficiency of care.

Reducing low-value imaging-A qualitative evaluation of a pilot intervention in Norway.

RATIONAL: Low-value radiological imaging threatens patient safety and efficient use of limited health resources. It is important to evaluate measures for reducing low-value utilisation, to learn and to improve. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to qualitatively evaluate a pilot intervention for reducing low-value imaging in Norway. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted aimed at describing stakeholders' experience with a multicomponent pilot intervention consisting of a standardised procedure for referral assessment, a standardised return letter, and information about the value and possible risks of magnetic resonance imaging-examinations to the public. Data were analysed in line with qualitative content analysis with a deductive approach. RESULTS: Seven healthcare providers were interviewed, including two radiologists, two radiographers, one manual therapist, one practice consultant and one general practitioner. Data analysis yielded four categories: (1) information and reception, (2) referral- and assessment processes, (3) suggestions for improvement and facilitation and (4) outcomes of the pilot intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The pilot intervention was deemed acceptable, feasible, engaging and relevant. Specific training in the use of the new procedure was suggested to improve the intervention. The simple design, as well as the positive acceptance demonstrated and the few resources needed, make the pilot intervention and methodology highly relevant for other settings or when aiming to reduce the number of other low-value radiology examinations.

A controlled weight loss intervention study among women of Somali background in Norway.

Background: Women of Somali background in Norway have a high prevalence of overweight and obesity, compared with women in the general Norwegian population. For lifestyle interventions to be applicable for immigrants to Norway, it is important to culturally tailor interventions in collaboration with relevant communities. The primary outcome was a difference in weight change between the intervention and control groups. Methods: In this interventional study, Somali women living in one borough of Oslo Municipality in Norway with body mass index (BMI) ≥27.0 kg.m-2 received a co-created, culturally tailored 12-month weight loss intervention consisting of 24 interactive sessions during the first three months, and monthly sessions for the next nine months, compared to a control group. Both groups were measured at baseline and 12 months. Results: A total of 169 participants were recruited, and 101 participants completed the follow-up. After multiple imputation, the mean difference in weight change adjusted for baseline weight, age, education, employment, marital status, number of children in the household and length of Norwegian residency was -1.6 kg (95 % CI -3.57, 0.43, p = 0.12) in the intervention compared to the control group. Conclusion: This culturally tailored intervention study demonstrated a modest non-significant effect on weight change after 12 months, possibly due to the short intervention duration and COVID-19. Further studies of a longer duration and considering the provision of childcare are needed to understand whether this approach can be transferred to other immigrant groups and genders.Trial registration: The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT04578067, 2020-09-29.

Success factors for interventions to reduce low-value imaging. Six crucial lessons learned from a practical case study in Norway.

BACKGROUND: Substantial overuse of health care services is identified and intensified efforts are incited to reduce low-value services in general and in imaging in particular. OBJECTIVE: To report crucial success factors for developing and implementing interventions to reduce specific low-value imaging examinations based on a case study in Norway. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mixed methods design including one systematic review, one scoping review, implementation science, qualitative interviews, content analysis of stakeholders' input, and stakeholder deliberations. RESULTS: The description and analysis of an intervention to reduce low-value imaging in Norway identifies six general success factors: 1) Acknowledging complexity: advanced knowledge synthesis, competence of the context, and broad and strong stakeholder involvement is crucial to manage de-implementation complexity. 2) Clear consensus-based criteria for selecting low-value imaging procedures are key. 3) Having a clear target group is critical. 4) Stakeholder engagement is essential to ascertain intervention relevance and compliance. 5) Active and well-motivated intervention collaborators is imperative. 6) Paying close attention to the mechanisms of low-value imaging and the barriers to reduce it is decisive. CONCLUSION: Reducing low-value imaging is crucial to increase the quality, safety, efficiency, and sustainability of the health services. Reducing low-value imaging is a complex task and paying attention to specific practical success factors is key.