Low-value chronic prescription of acid reducing medication among Dutch general practitioners: impact of a patient education intervention.

BACKGROUND: Dyspepsia is a commonly encountered clinical condition in Dutch general practice, which is often treated through the prescription of acid-reducing medication (ARM). However, recent studies indicate that the majority of chronic ARM users lack an indication for their use and that their long-term use is associated with adverse outcomes. We developed a patient-focussed educational intervention aiming to reduce low-value (chronic) use of ARM. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled study, and evaluated its effect on the low-value chronic prescription of ARM using data from a subset (n = 26) of practices from the Nivel Primary Care Database. The intervention involved distributing an educational waiting room posters and flyers informing both patients and general practitioners (GPs) regarding the appropriate indications for prescription of an ARM for dyspepsia, which also referred to an online decision aid. The interventions' effect was evaluated through calculation of the odds ratio of a patient receiving a low-value chronic ARM prescription over the second half of 2021 and 2022 (i.e. pre-intervention vs. post-intervention). RESULTS: In both the control and intervention groups, the proportion of patients receiving chronic low-value ARM prescriptions slightly increased. In the control group, it decreased from 50.3% in 2021 to 49.7% in 2022, and in the intervention group it increased from 51.3% in 2021 to 53.1% in 2022. Subsequent statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in low-value chronic prescriptions between the control and intervention groups (Odds ratio: 1.11 [0.84-1.47], p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our educational intervention did not result in a change in the low-value chronic prescription of ARM; approximately half of the patients of the intervention and control still received low-value chronic ARM prescriptions. The absence of effect might be explained by selection bias of participating practices, awareness on the topic of chronic AMR prescriptions and the relative low proportion of low-value chronic ARM prescribing in the intervention as well as the control group compared to an assessment conducted two years prior. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 10/31/2023 NCT06108817.

Trends in low-value GP care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies showed that during the pandemic patients have refrained from visiting their general practitioner (GP). This resulted in medical care being delayed, postponed or completely forgone. The provision of low-value care, i.e. care which offers no net benefit for the patient, also could have been affected. We therefore assessed the impact of the COVID-19 restrictions on three types of low-value GP care: 1) imaging for back or knee problems, 2) antibiotics for otitis media acuta (OMA), and 3) repeated opioid prescriptions, without a prior GP visit. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using registration data from GPs part of an academic GP network over the period 2017-2022. The COVID-19 period was defined as the period between April 2020 to December 2021. The periods before (January 2017 to April 2020) and after the COVID-19 period (January 2022 to December 2022) are the pre- and post-restrictions periods. The three clinical practices examined were selected by two practicing GPs from a top 30 of recommendations originating from the Dutch GP guidelines, based on their perceived prevalence and relevance in practice (van Dulmen et al., BMC Primary Care 23:141, 2022). Multilevel Poisson regression models were built to examine changes in the incidence rates (IR) of both registered episodes and episodes receiving low-value treatment. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 restrictions period, the IRs of episodes of all three types of GP care decreased significantly. The IR of episodes of back or knee pain decreased by 12%, OMA episodes by 54% and opioid prescription rate by 13%. Only the IR of OMA episodes remained significantly lower (22%) during the post-restrictions period. The provision of low-value care also changed. The IR of imaging for back or knee pain and low-value prescription of antibiotics for OMA both decreased significantly during the COVID-restrictions period (by 21% and 78%), but only the low-value prescription rate of antibiotics for OMA remained significantly lower (by 63%) during the post-restrictions period. The IR of inappropriately repeated opioid prescriptions remained unchanged over all three periods. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that both the rate of episodes as well as the rate at which low-value care was provided have generally been affected by the COVID-19 restrictions. Furthermore, it shows that the magnitude of the impact of the restrictions varies depending on the type of low-value care. This indicates that deimplementation of low-value care requires tailored (multiple) interventions and may not be achieved through a single disruption or intervention alone.

Low-value home-based nursing care: A national survey study.

AIMS: To explore potential areas of low-value home-based nursing care practices, their prevalence and related influencing factors of nurses and nursing assistants working in home-based nursing care. DESIGN: A quantitative, cross-sectional design. METHODS: An online survey with questions containing scaled frequencies on five-point Likert scales and open questions on possible related influencing factors of low-value nursing care. The data collection took place from February to April 2022. Descriptive statistics and linear regression were used to summarize and analyse the results. RESULTS: A nationwide sample of 776 certified nursing assistants, registered nurses and nurse practitioners responded to the survey. The top five most delivered low-value care practices reported were: (1) 'washing the client with water and soap by default', (2) 'application of zinc cream, powders or pastes when treating intertrigo', (3) 'washing the client from head to toe daily', (4) 're-use of a urinary catheter bag after removal/disconnection' and (5) 'bladder irrigation to prevent clogging of urinary tract catheter'. The top five related influencing factors reported were: (1) 'a (general) practitioner advices/prescribes it', (2) 'written in the client's care plan', (3) 'client asks for it', (4) 'wanting to offer the client something' and (5) 'it is always done like this in the team'. Higher educational levels and an age above 40 years were associated with a lower provision of low-value care. CONCLUSION: According to registered nurses and certified nursing assistants, a number of low-value nursing practices occurred frequently in home-based nursing care and they experienced multiple factors that influence the provision of low-value care such as (lack of) clinical autonomy and handling clients' requests, preferences and demands. The results can be used to serve as a starting point for a multifaceted de-implementation strategy. REPORTING METHOD: STROBE checklist for cross-sectional studies. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No Patient or Public Contribution. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Nursing care is increasingly shifting towards the home environment. Not all nursing care that is provided is effective or efficient and this type of care can therefore be considered of low-value. Reducing low-value care and increasing appropriate care will free up time, improve quality of care, work satisfaction, patient safety and contribute to a more sustainable healthcare system.

Characteristics Associated With Telemonitoring Use Among Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic heart failure (HF) is a chronic disease affecting more than 64 million people worldwide, with an increasing prevalence and a high burden on individual patients and society. Telemonitoring may be able to mitigate some of this burden by increasing self-management and preventing use of the health care system. However, it is unknown to what degree telemonitoring has been adopted by hospitals and if the use of telemonitoring is associated with certain patient characteristics. Insight into the dissemination of this technology among hospitals and patients may inform strategies for further adoption. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore the use of telemonitoring among hospitals in the Netherlands and to identify patient characteristics associated with the use of telemonitoring for HF. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study based on routinely collected health care claim data in the Netherlands. Descriptive analyses were used to gain insight in the adoption of telemonitoring for HF among hospitals in 2019. We used logistic multiple regression analyses to explore the associations between patient characteristics and telemonitoring use. RESULTS: Less than half (31/84, 37%) of all included hospitals had claims for telemonitoring, and 20% (17/84) of hospitals had more than 10 patients with telemonitoring claims. Within these 17 hospitals, a total of 7040 patients were treated for HF in 2019, of whom 5.8% (409/7040) incurred a telemonitoring claim. Odds ratios (ORs) for using telemonitoring were higher for male patients (adjusted OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.50-2.41) and patients with previous hospital treatment for HF (adjusted OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.39-2.24). ORs were lower for higher age categories and were lowest for the highest age category, that is, patients older than 80 years (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.21-0.44) compared to the reference age category (18-59 years). Socioeconomic status, degree of multimorbidity, and excessive polypharmacy were not associated with the use of telemonitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The use of reimbursed telemonitoring for HF was limited up to 2019, and our results suggest that large variation exists among hospitals. A lack of adoption is therefore not only due to a lack of diffusion among hospitals but also due to a lack of scaling up within hospitals that already deploy telemonitoring. Future studies should therefore focus on both kinds of adoption and how to facilitate these processes. Older patients, female patients, and patients with no previous hospital treatment for HF were less likely to use telemonitoring for HF. This shows that some patient groups are not served as much by telemonitoring as other patient groups. The underlying mechanism of the reported associations should be identified in order to gain a deeper understanding of telemonitoring use among different patient groups.

Sustainable adoption of noninvasive telemonitoring for chronic heart failure: A qualitative study in the Netherlands.

Objective: Noninvasive telemonitoring aims to improve healthcare for patients with chronic heart failure (HF) by reducing hospitalizations and improving patient experiences. Yet, sustainable adoption seems to be limited. Therefore, the goal of our study is to gain insight in the processes that support sustainable adoption of telemonitoring for patients with HF. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders that were involved with the adoption of telemonitoring, such as healthcare professionals, policymakers and healthcare insurers. We analyzed the interviews by using a combination of open-coding and the themes of the Non-adoption or Abandonment of technology by individuals and difficulties achieving Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability framework. Results: We found that telemonitoring projects have moved beyond initial pilot phases despite a high level of complexity on multiple topics. The patient selection, the business case, the evidence, the aims of telemonitoring, integration of telemonitoring in the care pathway, reimbursement, and future centralization were items that yielded different and sometimes contradictory opinions. Conclusions: This study showed that the sustainable adoption of telemonitoring for HF is a complex endeavor. Different aims and perspectives play an important role in the patient selection, design, evaluations and envisioned futures of telemonitoring. High conviction among participants of the added value that telemonitoring may support further adoption of telemonitoring. Structural evaluations will be needed to guide cyclical improvement and adapt programs to employ telemonitoring in such a manner that it contributes to collectively supported aims.

What are Effective Strategies to Reduce Low-Value Care? An Analysis of 121 Randomized Deimplementation Studies.

BACKGROUND: Low-value care is healthcare leading to no or little clinical benefit for the patient. The best (combinations of) interventions to reduce low-value care are unclear. PURPOSE: To provide an overview of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating deimplementation strategies, to quantify the effectiveness and describe different combinations of strategies. METHODS: Analysis of 121 RCTs (1990-2019) evaluating a strategy to reduce low-value care, identified by a systematic review. Deimplementation strategies were described and associations between strategy characteristics and effectiveness explored. RESULTS: Of 109 trials comparing deimplementation to usual care, 75 (69%) reported a significant reduction of low-value healthcare practices. Seventy-three trials included in a quantitative analysis showed a median relative reduction of 17% (IQR 7%-42%). The effectiveness of deimplementation strategies was not associated with the number and types of interventions applied. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Most deimplementation strategies achieved a considerable reduction of low-value care. We found no signs that a particular type or number of interventions works best for deimplementation. Future deimplementation studies should map relevant contextual factors, such as the workplace culture or economic factors. Interventions should be tailored to these factors and provide details regarding sustainability of the effect.

Low-value wound care: Are nurses and physicians choosing wisely? A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Choosing Wisely is an international movement that stimulates conversations about unnecessary care. The campaign created five recommendations including a statement that less wound care is sometimes better. AIMS: The study aims to evaluate nurses' and physicians' adherence to the Choosing Wisely recommendations for acute wound care in the Netherlands and the barriers and facilitators to improve this. DESIGN: This is a mixed methods study using a survey and interviews. METHODS: The survey was completed by 171 nurses and 71 physicians from November 2017 to February 2018. A total of 17 nurses and 6 physicians were interviewed. RESULTS: Awareness of the five recommendations ranged from 62% to 89% for nurses and 46% to 85% for physicians. However, up to 15% of the nurses and 28% of physicians were aware but did not adhere to the recommendations. Barriers to adhering were a lack of knowledge, the work environment and perceptions of patients' preferences. Repeated attention, cost-consciousness and an open culture facilitated the implementation. CONCLUSION: Although most nurses and physicians were aware of the recommendations, not all adhered to them. Increasing awareness is not enough for successful implementation. A tailored approach that removes the barriers is necessary, such as increasing knowledge about wounds and changing the work environment.

[Trends in number of vitamin B12- and D-determinations in the Netherlands]. / Trends in vitamine B12- en D-bepalingen in Nederland.

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight into the volume of vitamin B12- and D-determinations over time. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. METHOD: Using declaration data of around 3.5 million insured Dutch citizens we examined the volume of vitamin B12- and D-testing between 2015-2019. Both trends in number and proportion of patients receiving a vitamin B12- and D determination were assessed. RESULTS: Between 2015-2019 the number of vitamin B12-determinations increased by 98,1% and the number of vitamin D-determinations by 112%. The proportion of patients receiving a determination increased from 4,8% to 8,4% for vitamin B12 and from 4,7% to 9,1% for vitamin D over the examined period. CONCLUSION: Both the number of and proportion of patients receiving a vitamin B12- and D-determinations increased over the examined time period. Our findings emphasize the need for proper patient and physician information regarding the indications which justify vitamin B12- or D testing, in order to reduce and prevent overtesting.

Association between acute care collaborations and health care utilization as compared to stand-alone facilities in the Netherlands: a quasi-experimental study.

Health systems invest in coordination and collaboration between emergency departments (ED) and after-hours primary care providers (AHPCs) to alleviate pressure on the acute care chain. There are substantial gaps in the existing evidence, limited in sample size, follow-up care, and costs. We assess whether acute care collaborations (ACCs) are associated with decreased ED utilization, hospital admission rates, and lower costs per patient journey, compared with stand-alone facilities. The design is a quasi-experimental study using claims data. The study included 610 845 patients in the Netherlands (2017). Patient visits in ACCs were compared to stand-alone EDs and AHPCs. The number of comorbidities was similar in both groups. Multiple logistic and gamma regressions were used to determine whether patient visits to ACCs were negatively associated with ED utilization, hospital admission rates, and costs. Logistic regression analysis did not find an association between patients visiting ACCs and ED utilization compared to patients visiting stand-alone facilities [odds ratio (OR), 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.00-1.03]. However, patients in ACCs were associated with an increase in hospital admissions (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.09). ACCs were associated with higher total costs incurred during the patient journey (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03). Collaboration between EDs and AHPCs was not associated with ED utilization, but was associated with increased hospital admission rates, and higher costs. These collaborations do not seem to improve health systems' financial sustainability.

Use of regional transmural agreements to support the right care in the right place for patients with chronic heart failure-a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic heart failure (CHF) poses a major challenge for healthcare systems. As these patients' needs vary over time in intensity and complexity, the coordination of care between primary and secondary care is critical for them to receive the right care in the right place. To support the continuum of care needed, Dutch regional transmural agreements (RTAs) between healthcare providers have been developed. However, little is known about how the stakeholders have experienced the development and use of these RTAs. The aim of this study was to gain insight into how stakeholders have experienced the development and use of RTAs for CHF and explore which factors affected this. METHODS: We interviewed 25 stakeholders from 9 Dutch regions based on the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations framework. Interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed through open thematic coding. RESULTS: In most cases, the RTA development was considered relatively easy. However, the participants noted that sustainable use of the RTAs faced different complexities and influencing factors. These barriers concerned the following themes: education of primary care providers, referral process, patients' willingness, relationships between healthcare providers, reimbursement by health insurance companies, electronic health record (EHR) systems and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Some complexities, such as reimbursement and EHR systems, are likely to benefit from specialised support or a national approach. On a regional level, interregional learning can improve stakeholders' experiences. Future research should focus on quantitative effects of RTAs on outcomes and potential financing models for projects that aim to transition care from one setting to another.

Effects of DementiaNet's Community Care Network Approach on Admission Rates and Healthcare Costs: A Longitudinal Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia are increasingly living at home, relying on primary care providers for most healthcare needs. Suboptimal collaboration and communication between providers could cause inefficiencies and worse patient outcomes. Innovative strategies are needed to address this growing disease burden and rising healthcare costs. The DementiaNet programme, a community care network approach targeted at patients with dementia in the Netherlands, has been shown to improve patient's quality of care. However, very little is known about the impact of DementiaNet on admission risks and healthcare costs. This study addresses this knowledge gap. METHODS: A longitudinal cohort analysis was performed, using medical and long-term care claims data from 38 525 patients between 2015-2019. The primary outcomes were risk of hospital admission and annual total healthcare costs. Mixed-model regression analyses were used to identify changes in outcomes. RESULTS: Patients who received care from a DementiaNet community care network showed a general trend in lower risk of admission for all types of admissions studied (ie, hospital, emergency ward, intensive care, crisis, and nursing home). Also, the intervention group showed a significant reduction of 12% in nursing days (relative risk [RR] 0.88; 95% CI: 0.77- 0.96). No significant differences were found for total healthcare costs. However, we found effects in two sub-elements of total healthcare costs, being a decrease of 19.7% (95% CI: 7.7%-30.2%) in annual hospital costs and an increase of 10.2% (95% CI: 2.3%-18.6%) in annual primary care costs. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that DementiaNet's community care network approach may reduce admission risks for patients with dementia over a long-term period of five years. This is accompanied by a decrease in nursing days and savings in hospital care that exceed increased primary care costs. This improvement in integrated dementia care supports wider scale implementation and evaluation of these networks.

Development of the SPREAD framework to support the scaling of de-implementation strategies: a mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to increase the understanding of the scaling of de-implementation strategies by identifying the determinants of the process and developing a determinant framework. DESIGN AND METHODS: This study has a mixed-methods design. First, we performed an integrative review to build a literature-based framework describing the determinants of the scaling of healthcare innovations and interventions. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant studies from 1995 to December 2020. We systematically extracted the determinants of the scaling of interventions and developed a literature-based framework. Subsequently, this framework was discussed in four focus groups with national and international de-implementation experts. The literature-based framework was complemented by the findings of the focus group meetings and adapted for the scaling of de-implementation strategies. RESULTS: The literature search resulted in 42 articles that discussed the determinants of the scaling of innovations and interventions. No articles described determinants specifically for de-implementation strategies. During the focus groups, all participants agreed on the relevance of the extracted determinants for the scaling of de-implementation strategies. The experts emphasised that while the determinants are relevant for various countries, the implications differ due to different contexts, cultures and histories. The analyses of the focus groups resulted in additional topics and determinants, namely, medical training, professional networks, interests of stakeholders, clinical guidelines and patients' perspectives. The results of the focus group meetings were combined with the literature framework, which together formed the supporting the scaling of de-implementation strategies (SPREAD) framework. The SPREAD framework includes determinants from four domains: (1) scaling plan, (2) external context, (3) de-implementation strategy and (4) adopters. CONCLUSIONS: The SPREAD framework describes the determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies. These determinants are potential targets for various parties to facilitate the scaling of de-implementation strategies. Future research should validate these determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies.

Towards population-based payment models in a multiple-payer system: the case of the Netherlands.

The Dutch private multi-payer system is characterised by a catalogue that is dominated by fee-for-service based payments. Up to now, alternative payment models have not taken flight. Recent small-scale experiments show substantial potential benefits of population-based payment models. Drawing on international literature and two expert focus groups, we analyse how population-based payments may be taken up more fiercely in a system run on the principles of managed competition. The decentralised nature of the Dutch system naturally aligns with a bottom-up implementation approach. Payers and providers can initiate population-based payment systems to fit local needs, but should determine clear preconditions that focus on quality of care. Quality indicators tied to financial incentives, such as shared savings, might minimise risks of undertreatment. Deliberative processes between payer and providers may determine adequate indicators. Upfront investments are needed to facilitate necessary data infrastructure. Furthermore, alternative payment systems might be encouraged through nationally set default options towards integrated payment systems, potentially reducing administrative burdens. Strong leadership, trust, and mutual understanding are paramount to overcome silos to integrate services across providers. Policymakers in other multi-payer managed competition systems may benefit from these insights.

A practice test and selection of a core set of outcome-based quality indicators in Dutch primary care physical therapy for patients with COPD: a cohort study.

Aim: To estimate the comparability and discriminability of outcome-based quality indicators by performing a practice test in Dutch physical therapy primary care, and to select a core set of outcome-based quality indicators that are well accepted by physical therapists based on their perceived added value as a quality improvement tool. Methods: First, a list of potential quality indicators was defined, followed by determination of the comparability (case-mix adjusted multilevel analysis) and discriminability (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)). Second, focus group meetings were conducted with stakeholders (physical therapists and senior researchers) to select a core set of quality indicators. Results: Overall, 229 physical therapists from 137 practices provided 2651 treatment episodes. Comparability: in 10 of the 11 case-mix adjusted models, the ICC increased compared with the intercept-only model. Discriminability: the ICC ranged between 0.01 and 0.34, with five of the 11 ICCs being >0.10. The majority of physical therapists in each focus group preferred the inclusion of seven quality indicators in the core set, including three process and four outcome indicators based upon the 6-min walk test (6MWT), the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), and the determination of quadriceps strength using a hand-held dynamometer. Conclusion: This is the first study to describe the comparability and discriminability of the outcome-based quality indicators selected for patients with COPD treated in primary care physical therapy practices. Future research should focus on increasing data collection in daily practice and on the development of tangible methods to use as the core set of a quality improvement tool.

Experiences of physiotherapists regarding a standard set of measurement instruments to improve quality of care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a mixed methods study.

RATIONALE: The quality of physiotherapy care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be improved by comparing outcomes of care in practice. AIM: To evaluate the experiences of physiotherapists implementing a standard set of measurement instruments to measure outcomes and improve the quality of care for patients with COPD. METHODS: This sequential explanatory mixed methods study was performed in two parts. In the quantitative part, a survey of 199 physiotherapists was conducted to evaluate their attitudes and knowledge, as well as the influence of contextual factors (i.e., practice policy and support from colleagues), in the implementation of the standard measurement set. In the qualitative part, 11 physiotherapists participated in individual interviews to elucidate their experiences using a thematical framework. RESULTS: The survey showed that, on average, 68.4% of the physiotherapists reported having a positive attitude about using the standard set, 85.0% felt they had sufficient knowledge of the measurement instruments, and 84.7% felt supported by practice policy and colleagues. In total, 80.3% of physiotherapists thought the standard set had added value in clinical practice, and 90.3% indicated that the measurement instruments can be valuable for evaluating treatment outcomes. The physiotherapists mentioned several barriers, such as lack of time and the unavailability of the entire standard set of measurement instruments in their practice. Moreover, the physiotherapists indicated that the measurement instruments have added value in providing transparency to policymakers through the anonymized publication of outcomes. CONCLUSION: Physiotherapists support the use of the standard set of measurement instruments to improve the quality of physiotherapy treatment for patients with COPD.

Identifying and prioritizing do-not-do recommendations in Dutch primary care.

BACKGROUND: Low-value care provides minimal or no benefit for the patient, wastes resources, and can cause harm. Explicit do-not-do recommendations in clinical guidelines are a first step in reducing low-value care. The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize do-not-do recommendations in general practice guidelines with priority for implementation. METHODS: We used a mixed method design in Dutch primary care. First, we identified do-not-do recommendations through a systematic assessment of 92 Dutch guidelines for general practitioners (GPs), resulting in 385 do-not-do recommendations. Second, we selected 146 recommendations addressing high prevalent conditions. Third, a random sample of 5000 Dutch GPs was invited for an online survey to prioritize recommendations based on the prevalence of the condition and low-value care practice, potential harm, and potential cost reduction on a scale from 1 to 5/6. Total scores could range from 4 to 22. Recommendations with a median score > 12 were included. In total, 440 GPs completed the survey. RESULTS: The selection process led to 30 prioritised recommendations. These covered drug treatments (n = 12), diagnostics (n = 10), referral to other healthcare professions (n = 5), and non-drug treatment (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Dutch clinical guidelines include many do-not-do recommendations that are perceived as highly relevant by the GPs. The list of 30 high-priority do-not-do recommendations can be used to raise awareness of low-value care among GPs. As the recommendations are supported with the latest evidence from international studies, primary healthcare professionals and policy makers worldwide can use the list for further validating the list in their local context and designing strategies to reduce low-value care.

Low-value pharmaceutical care among Dutch GPs: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Low-value pharmaceutical care exists in general practice. However, the extent among Dutch GPs remains unknown. AIM: To assess the prevalence of low-value pharmaceutical care among Dutch GPs. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective cohort study using data from patient records. METHOD: The prevalence of three types of pharmaceutical care prescribed by GPs between 2016 and 2019 were examined: topical antibiotics for conjunctivitis, benzodiazepines for non-specific lower back pain, and chronic acid-reducing medication (ARM) prescriptions. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed to assess prescribing variation and the influence of patient characteristics on receiving a low-value prescription. RESULTS: Large variation in prevalence as well as practice variation was observed among the types of low-value pharmaceutical GP care examined. Between 53% and 61% of patients received an inappropriate antibiotics prescription for conjunctivitis, around 3% of patients with lower back pain received an inappropriate benzodiazepine prescription, and 88% received an inappropriate chronic ARM prescription during the years examined. The odds of receiving an inappropriate antibiotic or benzodiazepine prescription increased with age (P<0.001), but decreased for chronic inappropriate ARM prescriptions (P<0.001). Sex affected only the odds of receiving a non-indicated chronic ARM, with males being at higher risk (P<0.001). The odds of receiving an inappropriate ARM increased with increasing neighbourhood socioeconomic status (P<0.05). Increasing practice size decreased the odds of inappropriate antibiotic and benzodiazepine prescriptions (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The results show that the prevalence of low-value pharmaceutical GP care varies among these three clinical problems. Significant variation in inappropriate prescribing exists between different types of pharmaceutical care - and GP practices.

The Impact of Payment Reforms on the Quality and Utilisation of Healthcare for Patients With Multimorbidity: A Systematic Review.

Inadequate treatment of multimorbidity is recognised as a major determinant of the effectiveness of healthcare and also of its inappropriate expenditures. However, current payment systems target, primarily, the treatment of single diseases, thus hindering integrated delivery of care for patients with multimorbidity (PwM). This review aims to assess the effects of targeted reforms of payment systems which could help attain a higher quality of care and reduce unnecessary healthcare utilisation. In June 2020, a search of Medline and EMBASE revealed 13 relevant articles. The most common payment models were the use of bundled payments (n = 4) and diagnosis-related group payments (n = 4). Except for an increase in hospital admissions (n = 3), no outcome showed unambiguous significant effects across more than one study. The two studies which focused explicitly on PwM showed a significant decrease in 30-day hospital readmissions. This, however, was not maintained after 60 days in one study. No general conclusion could be drawn on the effects of targeted payment reforms for PwM. Our findings suggest that reforms should be combined with more multifaceted healthcare delivery to address the complex patterns of healthcare use effectively. Thorough evaluations of targeted payment reforms are needed urgently to contribute to the body of evidence required.