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.

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.

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.

What is in it for me? Norwegian radiographers and radiation therapists' experiences from obtaining a master's degree.

INTRODUCTION: Radiographers and radiation therapists are essential in providing patients with high-quality diagnostic imaging or therapeutic services. Therefore, radiographers and radiation therapists must get involved in evidence-based practice and research. Even though many radiographers and radiation therapists obtain their master's degrees, little is known about how this degree affects clinical practice or personal and professional growth. We aimed to fill this knowledge gap by investigating Norwegian radiographers' and radiation therapists' experiences when deciding to undertake and complete a master's degree and exploring the impact of the master's degree in clinical practice. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted and transcribed verbatim. The interview guide covered five broad areas: 1) the process of achieving a master's degree, 2) the work situation, 3) the value of competencies, 4) the use of competencies and 5) expectations. Data were analyzed using inductive content analysis. RESULTS: The analysis included seven participants (four diagnostic radiographers and three radiation therapists) working at six different departments of varying sizes across Norway. Four main categories emerged from the analysis, of which the categories: Motivation and Management support, were categorized into the theme experiences pre-graduation, whereas the categories Personal gain and Application of skills were categorized into the theme experiences pre-graduation. The fifth category Perception of pioneering embraces both themes. CONCLUSION: Participants reported great motivation and personal gain, but challenges in management and application of skills post-graduation. The participants perceived themselves as pioneers, as there is a lack of experience with radiographers and radiation therapists undertaking master studies, hence no culture and systems for professional development are established. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: There is a need for professional development and research culture in the Norwegian Departments of Radiology and Radiation therapy. Radiographers and radiation therapists must take the initiative to establish such. Further research should investigate managers' attitudes and perceptions toward radiographers' master's competencies in the clinic.

Drivers for low-value imaging: a qualitative study of stakeholders' perspectives in Norway.

BACKGROUND: One kind of overutilization of diagnostic imaging is low-value imaging, i.e., imaging that does not lead to altered clinical pathways or improved health outcomes. Despite having well-documented extension and consequences, low-value imaging is still widespread. The objective of this study was to identify the drivers for the use of low-value imaging in the Norwegian healthcare services. METHODS: We conducted individual, semi-structured interviews among representatives from the health authorities, general practitioners, specialists working in hospitals, radiologists, radiographers, and managers of imaging departments. Data analysis was carried out in line with framework analysis consisting of five steps: Familiarization, indexing, charting, mapping, and interpretation. RESULTS: The analysis included 27 participants and resulted in two themes. The stakeholders identified drivers in the healthcare system and in the interaction between radiologists, referrers, and patients. The identified drivers were categorized in sub-themes, such as organization, communication, competence, expectations, defensive medicine, roles and responsibilities, and referral quality and time constraints. The drivers interact with each other and may strengthen the effect of other drivers. CONCLUSIONS: Several drivers for low-value imaging in Norway were identified at all levels of the healthcare system. The drivers work simultaneously and synergistically. To free resources for high-value imaging, drivers should be targeted by appropriate measures at several levels to reduce low-value imaging.

The use of low-value imaging: the role of referral practice and access to imaging services in a representative area of Norway.

BACKGROUND: Even though imaging is essential to modern medicine, some examinations are of low value as they do not lead to any change in the management of the patient. The Choosing Wisely (CW) campaign aims to reduce the use of such services. In the Norwegian version of CW, specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the head, lower back, and knee are amongst others identified as potential low-value examinations. However, referral practice and access to imaging may drive low-value utilisation. By using registry data from 2019 and descriptive analysis, this study aimed to examine the role of referral practice and access to imaging on the use of specific CW-examinations in one representative area in Norway. RESULTS: A total of 237,554 examinations were performed by four public and two private imaging facilities located within the area. Forty-two percent (19,210/45,289) of all MRI examinations were related to CW. Private imaging centres performed most of the CW-imaging. A total of 3700 referrers were identified, and 2.3% were identified as "high-referrers," accounting for 33% of all CW-examinations. Referrers' experience did not influence imaging utilisation. A subset of referrers ("super-referrers," 0.5%) accounted for 10% of CW-examinations. Distance to service had no impact on the use of CW-examinations. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides valuable insight into the use of imaging and referral practice in one representative area in Norway. A great variation in referral practice was observed. Therefore, targeting referrers with high referral rates may be a promising strategy for reducing the use of low-value imaging.

Increased magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer management-What are the outcomes?

RATIONALE: Increased attention to cancer care has instigated altered systems for screening, diagnosis, and management of various types of cancer, such as in the prostate. While such systems very likely have improved the quality of cancer care, they also result in the altered use of specific services, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: To study the change in the use of prostate MRI in the Norwegian health care system from 2013 to 2021 and to investigate some reasons for and potential implications of this change. METHOD: Data from the Norwegian Health Economics Administration (HELFO), The Cancer Registry of Norway and Cause-of-death registry at the Norwegian Institute of public health and the health registry of Vestfold Hospital Trust were used for descriptive statistical analysis. RESULTS: The number of MRIs of the prostate increased threefold from 2013 to 2021, representing an extra cost of 2 million USD in 2020. The incidence of prostate cancer was stable at about 5000 cases per year, corresponding to 178 per 100,000 men, indicating no increased overdiagnosis. However, the clinical staging has changed substantially during this period, indicating stage and grade migration. The number of negative biopsies was reduced, and there are three MRIs per reduced negative biopsy. The number of persons on active surveillance increased during the period. However, these changes are partly independent of the increase in the number of MRIs. CONCLUSION: There was a substantial increase in the number of prostate MRIs and thus an increase in costs. This appears to have contributed to the reduction of negative biopsies, improved staging and increased active surveillance. However, as these effects are partly independent of the increase in MRIs, we need to document the outcomes for patients from prostate MRIs as their opportunity costs are substantial.

Reducing low-value radiological services in Norway -a qualitative multi-professional study on measures and facilitators for change.

BACKGROUND: Overuse, underuse, and significant variation in the utilisation of radiological services are well documented in the literature. Several radiological examinations are identified as low-value examinations as they do not lead to a change in diagnosis or course of treatment. Even so, such examinations are frequently performed. Many measures for reducing low-value imaging have been carried out with variable outcomes. While there is little evidence as to why some measures work and others do not, adjusting to the context seems important for success. The objective of this study was to investigate which measures stakeholders consider appropriate for reducing the use of low-value imaging and what it takes to make them work. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted among radiographers, radiologists, radiological department managers, hospital clinicians, general practitioners, and health government/authorities' representatives. The interview guide covered two broad areas: Experience with low-value services, and possible future measures deemed appropriate for reducing low-value services. Data were analysed in line with a qualitative framework analysis. RESULTS: The analysis included information from 27 participants. All participants acknowledged that low-value imaging was a problem, but few had very specific suggestions on reducing this in practice. Suggested measures were to stop referrals from being sent, provide support in assessing referrals, or change the healthcare system. Identified facilitators were categorised as management and resources, evidence, and experienced value. In general, appropriate measures should be practical, well-founded, and valuable. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into various stakeholders' perceptions of suitable interventions to reduce low-value imaging. While many measures for reducing low-value imaging are available, contextual sensitivity is crucial to make them work.

Characterizing and quantifying low-value diagnostic imaging internationally: a scoping review.

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.

Visualizing the Invisible: Invisible Waste in Diagnostic Imaging.

There is extensive waste in diagnostic imaging, at the same time as there are long waiting lists. While the problem of waste in diagnostics has been known for a long time, the problem persists. Accordingly, the objective of this study is to investigate various types of waste in imaging and why they are so pervasive and persistent in today's health services. After a short overview of different conceptions and types of waste in diagnostic imaging (in radiology), we identify two reasons why these types of waste are so difficult to address: (1) they are invisible in the healthcare system and (2) wasteful imaging is driven by strong external forces and internal drivers. Lastly, we present specific measures to address wasteful imaging. Visualizing and identifying the waste in diagnostic imaging and its ingrained drivers is one important way to improve the quality and efficiency of healthcare services.

What can we learn from the SARS-COV-2 pandemic about the value of specific radiological examinations?

BACKGROUND: The SARS-COV-2 pandemic provides a natural intervention to assess practical priority setting and internal evaluation of specific health services, such as radiological services. Norway makes an excellent case as it had a very low infection rate and very few cases of COVID-19. Accordingly, the objective of this study is to use the changes in performed outpatient radiological examinations during the first stages of the SARS-COV-2 pandemic to assess the practical evaluation of specific radiological examinations in Norway. METHODS: Data was collected retrospectively from the Norwegian Health Economics Administration (HELFO) in the years 2015-2020. Data included the number of performed outpatient imaging examinations at public hospitals and private imaging centers in Norway and was divided in to three periods based on the level of restrictions on elective health services. Results were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In the first period there was a 45% reduction in outpatient radiology compared to the same time period in 2015-2019 while in period 2 and 3 there was a 25 and 6% reduction respectively. The study identified a list of specific potential low-value radiological examinations. While some of these are covered by the Choosing Wisely campaign, others are not. CONCLUSION: By studying the priority setting practice during the initial phases of the pandemic this study identifies a set of potential low value radiological examinations during the initial phases of the SARS-COV-2 pandemic. These examinations are candidates for closer assessments for health services quality improvement.

Interventions to reduce low-value imaging - a systematic review of interventions and 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.

Women's experience of acute skin toxicity following radiation therapy in breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Acute skin toxicity is experienced by 70%-100% of patients receiving radiation therapy following breast cancer. Most studies focus on skin appearances and treatment of such reactions, not the experience. Increased knowledge about patients' experience will contribute to provide tailored patient care. Thus, the purpose was to investigate patients' experiences of acute skin toxicity following radiation therapy for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with seven women, 2-3 weeks post-treatment. Five broad areas of inquiry were investigated: 1) experiences from the development of skin reactions; 2) experiences in day-to-day life; 3) coping strategies; 4) experiences of information; and 5) experiences from the aftercare. The interviews were analyzed in line with qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The main theme "Not so bad itself, but it comes on top of everything else" was identified, based upon three categories: 1) unique experience of the skin; 2) it is something about the psychological aspect; and 3) experience of information. CONCLUSION: Acute skin toxicity following breast cancer treatment may affect many dimensions of patients' lives. Experiences are complex, individual, and not necessarily consistent with visible changes of the skin. A holistic approach is necessary to provide treatment and support according to patients' individual needs.

Reject analysis in direct digital radiography.

BACKGROUND: Reject analysis can be used as a quality indicator, and is an important tool in localizing areas where optimization is required. Reducing number of rejects is important yielding reduced patient exposure and increased cost-effectiveness. PURPOSE: To determine rejection rates and causes in direct digital radiography. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were collected during a three-month period in spring 2010 at two direct digital laboratories in Norway. All X-ray examinations, types, numbers, and reasons for rejections were obtained using automatic reject analysis software. Thirteen causes for rejection could be selected. RESULTS: Out of the 27,284 acquired images, 3206 were rejected, yielding an overall rejection rate of 12%. Highest rejection rates were found for examination of knees, shoulders, and wrist. In all, 77% of the rejected images arose from positioning errors. CONCLUSION: An overall rejection rate of 12% indicates a need for optimizing radiographic practice in the department.