Choosing Wisely in Adult Hospital Medicine: Co-creation of New Recommendations for Improved Healthcare Value by Clinicians and Patient Advocates.

BACKGROUND: The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation's Choosing Wisely campaign has resulted in a vast number of recommendations to reduce low-value care. Implementation of these recommendations, in conjunction with patient input, remains challenging. OBJECTIVE: To create updated Society of Hospital Medicine Adult Hospitalist Choosing Wisely recommendations that incorporate patient input from inception. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a multi-phase study conducted by the Society of Hospital Medicine's High Value Care Committee from July 2017 to January 2020 involving clinicians and patient advocates. APPROACH: Phase 1 involved gathering low-value care recommendations from patients and clinicians across the USA. Recommendations were reviewed by the committee in phase 2. Phase 3 involved a modified Delphi scoring in which 7 committee members and 7 patient advocates voted on recommendations based on strength of evidence, potential for patient harm, and relevance to either hospital medicine or patients. A patient-friendly script was developed to allow advocates to better understand the clinical recommendations. KEY RESULTS: A total of 1265 recommendations were submitted by clinicians and patients. After accounting for similar suggestions, 283 recommendations were categorized. Recommendations with more than 10 mentions were advanced to phase 3, leaving 22 recommendations for the committee and patient advocates to vote upon. Utilizing a 1-5 Likert scale, the top combined recommendations were reducing use of opioids (4.57), improving sleep (4.52), minimizing overuse of oxygen (4.52), reducing CK-MB use (4.50), appropriate venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (4.43), and decreasing daily chest x-rays (4.43). CONCLUSIONS: Specific voting categories, along with the use of patient-friendly language, allowed for the successful co-creation of recommendations.

Crossing Academic Boundaries for Diagnostic Safety: 10 Complex Challenges and Potential Solutions From Clinical Perspectives and High-Reliability Organizing Principles.

OBJECTIVE: We apply the high-reliability organization (HRO) paradigm to the diagnostic process, outlining challenges to enacting HRO principles in diagnosis and offering solutions for how diagnostic process stakeholders can overcome these barriers. BACKGROUND: Evidence shows that healthcare is starting to organize for higher reliability by employing various principles and practices of HRO. These hold promise for enhancing safer care, but there has been little consideration of the challenges that clinicians and healthcare systems face while enacting HRO principles in the diagnostic process. To effectively deploy the HRO perspective, these barriers must be seriously considered. METHOD: We review key principles of the HRO paradigm, the diagnostic errors and harms that potentially can be prevented by its enactment, the challenges that clinicians and healthcare systems face in executing various principles and practices, and possible solutions that clinicians and organizational leaders can take to overcome these challenges and barriers. RESULTS: Our analyses reveal multiple challenges including the inherent diagnostic uncertainty; the lack of diagnosis-focused performance feedback; the fact that diagnosis is often a solo, rather than team, activity; the tendency to simplify the diagnostic process; and professional and institutional status hierarchies. But these challenges are not insurmountable-there are strategies and solutions available to overcome them. CONCLUSION: The HRO lens offers some important ideas for how the safety of the diagnostic process can be improved. APPLICATION: The ideas proposed here can be enacted by both individual clinicians and healthcare leaders; both are necessary for making systematic progress in enhancing diagnostic performance.

Evaluating a mobile application for improving clinical laboratory test ordering and diagnosis.

Objective: Mobile applications for improving diagnostic decision making often lack clinical evaluation. We evaluated if a mobile application improves generalist physicians' appropriate laboratory test ordering and diagnosis decisions and assessed if physicians perceive it as useful for learning. Methods: In an experimental, vignette study, physicians diagnosed 8 patient vignettes with normal prothrombin times (PT) and abnormal partial thromboplastin times (PTT). Physicians made test ordering and diagnosis decisions for 4 vignettes using each resource: a mobile app, PTT Advisor, developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s Clinical Laboratory Integration into Healthcare Collaborative (CLIHC); and usual clinical decision support. Then, physicians answered questions regarding their perceptions of the app's usefulness for diagnostic decision making and learning using a modified Kirkpatrick Training Evaluation Framework. Results: Data from 368 vignettes solved by 46 physicians at 7 US health care institutions show advantages for using PTT Advisor over usual clinical decision support on test ordering and diagnostic decision accuracy (82.6 vs 70.2% correct; P < .001), confidence in decisions (7.5 vs 6.3 out of 10; P < .001), and vignette completion time (3:02 vs 3:53 min.; P = .06). Physicians reported positive perceptions of the app's potential for improved clinical decision making, and recommended it be used to address broader diagnostic challenges. Conclusions: A mobile app, PTT Advisor, may contribute to better test ordering and diagnosis, serve as a learning tool for diagnostic evaluation of certain clinical disorders, and improve patient outcomes. Similar methods could be useful for evaluating apps aimed at improving testing and diagnosis for other conditions.