Audit and feedback to change diagnostic image ordering practices: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of diagnostic imaging (DI) tests may be unnecessary, leading to increased healthcare costs and the possibility of patient harm. The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess the effect of audit and feedback (AF) interventions directed at healthcare providers on reducing image ordering. The secondary objective was to examine the effect of AF on the appropriateness of DI ordering. METHODS: Studies were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov registry on December 22nd, 2022. Studies were included if they were randomized control trials (RCTs), targeted healthcare professionals, and studied AF as the sole intervention or as the core component of a multi-faceted intervention. Risk of bias for each study was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analyses were completed using RevMan software and results were displayed in forest plots. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs enrolling 4311 clinicians or practices were included. AF interventions resulted in 1.5 fewer image test orders per 1000 patients seen than control interventions (95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference -2.6 to -0.4, p-value = 0.009). The effect of AF on appropriateness was not statistically significant, with a 3.2% (95% CI -1.5 to 7.7%, p-value = 0.18) greater likelihood of test orders being considered appropriate with AF vs control interventions. The strength of evidence was rated as moderate for the primary objective but was very low for the appropriateness outcome because of risk of bias, inconsistency in findings, indirectness, and imprecision. CONCLUSION: AF interventions are associated with a modest reduction in total DI ordering with moderate certainty, suggesting some benefit of AF. Individual studies document effects of AF on image order appropriateness ranging from a non-significant trend toward worsening to a highly significant improvement, but the weighted average effect size from the meta-analysis is not statistically significant with very low certainty.

Associations between perceptions of shared decision making and health among hysterectomy patients: A prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate patient and clinical factors that are associated with perceptions of shared decision making between hysterectomy patients and surgeons and to evaluate associations between shared decision making and postoperative health. METHODS: This study is based on a prospective cohort scheduled for hysterectomy for benign conditions in Vancouver, Canada. Validated patient-reported outcomes assessed shared decision making, pelvic health, depression, and pain. Regression analyses measured the association between perceptions of shared decision making with patient and clinical factors. Then, associations between shared decision making with postoperative pelvic health, pain and depression were evaluated using regression analysis and adjusted for patient and clinical factors. RESULTS: In this study, 308 participants completed preoperative measures, and a subset of 146 participants also completed the postoperative measures. More than 50% of participants reported less than optimal shared decision making scores. No significant associations were identified between patients' perceptions of shared decision making with patients' age, comorbidities, socioeconomic factors, indication for surgery, or preoperative depression and pain. Regression analyses found that higher/better self-reported shared decision making scores were associated with fewer postoperative pelvic organ symptoms (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Many patients' reporting lower than optimal scores on the shared decision making instrument highlight the opportunity to improve surgeon-patient communication in this surgical cohort. Strengthening shared decision making between surgeons and their patients may be associated with improved self-reported postoperative health.

A comparison of patient-reported outcomes among Canadian women having hysterectomies.

PURPOSE: Many indications for hysterectomy can negatively affect patients' quality of life. This study uses patient-reported outcomes to measure changes in self-reported health among hysterectomy patients. METHOD: A prospective cohort of 294 hysterectomy patients completed patient-reported outcomes preoperatively and six months postoperatively in Vancouver, Canada. Patient-reported outcomes measured pelvic health, sexual function, pain, and depression. Changes in health were compared with paired t-tests, and multi-variable regression analysis measured associations between patient and clinical factors with postoperative outcomes RESULTS: Many patients reported improvements in health. Unadjusted analysis found that 65% of participants reported less pelvic distress, 55% reported less pain, and 47% reported less depression symptoms postoperatively. Multivariable regression analysis found that poorer preoperative health was associated with poorer postoperative outcomes in all domains of health measured (p-value < 0.01). Postoperative pain scores were lower (less pain) by 0.78 among residents of the most affluent neighborhoods (p-value = 0.02) compared to those in less affluent neighborhoods. Postoperative depression scores were 1.58 points worse among participants with endometriosis (p-value = 0.03) and 1.02 points worse among participants having abdominal surgery (p-value = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Many participants reported improvements in pelvic symptoms, pain, and depression after hysterectomy. Lower socioeconomic status patients may be at risk for reporting higher pain after surgery, and endometriosis patients may report higher depression. Further investigation is needed to determine effective interventions for the higher postoperative pain observed in this study for residents of less affluent neighborhoods.

Differences in Preoperative Health-Related Quality of Life between Women Receiving Mastectomy or Breast Conserving Surgery in a Prospectively Recruited Cohort of Breast Cancer Patients.

As rates of total mastectomy rise, the relationships between surgery modality with domains of health-related quality of life is not well understood. This study reports differences in depression, anxiety, pain, and health status among a cohort of women scheduled to receive total mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery. Patient-reported outcomes measured preoperative differences between patients receiving total mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery in a cross-sectional design. Regression analyses was used to model health outcomes and adjust for patient demographics on patient measures. Participants scheduled for total mastectomy were more likely to report more severe symptoms of depression and anxiety. This association was non-significant after adjusting for demographic differences. Younger participants were more likely to be scheduled for total mastectomy. Age was negatively associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety. Screening patients for mental health symptoms may be particularly important among younger patients who were more likely to report depression and anxiety before their surgery and were more likely to receive total mastectomy.