A Broader View of Quality: Choosing Wisely Recommendations From Other Specialties With High Relevance to Emergency Care

ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee Workgroup on Choosing Wisely

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Study objective: The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) joined the Choosing Wisely campaign in 2013 and has contributed 10 recommendations to reduce low-value care. Recommendations from other specialties may also identify opportunities to improve quality and patient safety in emergency care. The Choosing Wisely work group of the ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee seeks to identify and characterize the Choosing Wisely recommendations from other professional societies with the highest relevance to emergency care. Methods: In June 2016, all Choosing Wisely recommendations from other specialties were obtained from the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation. Using a modified Delphi method, the 10 group members rated recommendations for relevance on a validated 7-point scale. Recommendations identified as highly relevant (median score=7) were rated on 3 additional characteristics: cost savings (1=large, 5=none), risk-benefit profile (1=benefit >risk, 5=risk >benefit), and actionability by emergency physicians (1=complete, 5=none). Results are presented as overall means (eg, mean of subcategory means) and subcategory means with SDs. Results: Initial review of 412 recommendations identified 49 items as highly relevant to emergency care. Eleven were redundant with ACEP recommendations, leaving 38 items from 25 professional societies. Overall means for items ranged from 1.57 to 3.1. Recommendations’ scores averaged 3.2 (SD 0.6) for cost savings, 1.9 (SD 0.4) for risk-benefit, and 1.6 (SD 0.5) for actionability. The most common conditions in these recommendations were infectious diseases (14 items; 37%), head injury (4 items; 11%), and primary headache disorders (4 items; 11%). The most frequently addressed interventions were imaging studies (11 items; 29%) and antibiotics (9 items; 24%). Conclusion: Thirty-eight Choosing Wisely recommendations from other specialties are highly relevant to emergency care. Imaging studies and antibiotic use are heavily represented among them.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)246-253
Number of pages8
JournalAnnals of emergency medicine
Volume72
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Emergency Medical Services
Emergencies
Cost Savings
Patient Safety
Physicians
Primary Headache Disorders
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Internal Medicine
Craniocerebral Trauma
Communicable Diseases

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

A Broader View of Quality : Choosing Wisely Recommendations From Other Specialties With High Relevance to Emergency Care. / ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee Workgroup on Choosing Wisely.

In: Annals of emergency medicine, Vol. 72, No. 3, 01.09.2018, p. 246-253.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee Workgroup on Choosing Wisely. / A Broader View of Quality : Choosing Wisely Recommendations From Other Specialties With High Relevance to Emergency Care. In: Annals of emergency medicine. 2018 ; Vol. 72, No. 3. pp. 246-253.
@article{148fade2c89d45da83d849ce7a38c159,
title = "A Broader View of Quality: Choosing Wisely Recommendations From Other Specialties With High Relevance to Emergency Care",
abstract = "Study objective: The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) joined the Choosing Wisely campaign in 2013 and has contributed 10 recommendations to reduce low-value care. Recommendations from other specialties may also identify opportunities to improve quality and patient safety in emergency care. The Choosing Wisely work group of the ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee seeks to identify and characterize the Choosing Wisely recommendations from other professional societies with the highest relevance to emergency care. Methods: In June 2016, all Choosing Wisely recommendations from other specialties were obtained from the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation. Using a modified Delphi method, the 10 group members rated recommendations for relevance on a validated 7-point scale. Recommendations identified as highly relevant (median score=7) were rated on 3 additional characteristics: cost savings (1=large, 5=none), risk-benefit profile (1=benefit >risk, 5=risk >benefit), and actionability by emergency physicians (1=complete, 5=none). Results are presented as overall means (eg, mean of subcategory means) and subcategory means with SDs. Results: Initial review of 412 recommendations identified 49 items as highly relevant to emergency care. Eleven were redundant with ACEP recommendations, leaving 38 items from 25 professional societies. Overall means for items ranged from 1.57 to 3.1. Recommendations’ scores averaged 3.2 (SD 0.6) for cost savings, 1.9 (SD 0.4) for risk-benefit, and 1.6 (SD 0.5) for actionability. The most common conditions in these recommendations were infectious diseases (14 items; 37{\%}), head injury (4 items; 11{\%}), and primary headache disorders (4 items; 11{\%}). The most frequently addressed interventions were imaging studies (11 items; 29{\%}) and antibiotics (9 items; 24{\%}). Conclusion: Thirty-eight Choosing Wisely recommendations from other specialties are highly relevant to emergency care. Imaging studies and antibiotic use are heavily represented among them.",
author = "{ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee Workgroup on Choosing Wisely} and Brandon Maughan and Elaine Rabin and Cantrill, {Stephen V.}",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.06.041",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "72",
pages = "246--253",
journal = "Annals of Emergency Medicine",
issn = "0196-0644",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Broader View of Quality

T2 - Choosing Wisely Recommendations From Other Specialties With High Relevance to Emergency Care

AU - ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee Workgroup on Choosing Wisely

AU - Maughan, Brandon

AU - Rabin, Elaine

AU - Cantrill, Stephen V.

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - Study objective: The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) joined the Choosing Wisely campaign in 2013 and has contributed 10 recommendations to reduce low-value care. Recommendations from other specialties may also identify opportunities to improve quality and patient safety in emergency care. The Choosing Wisely work group of the ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee seeks to identify and characterize the Choosing Wisely recommendations from other professional societies with the highest relevance to emergency care. Methods: In June 2016, all Choosing Wisely recommendations from other specialties were obtained from the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation. Using a modified Delphi method, the 10 group members rated recommendations for relevance on a validated 7-point scale. Recommendations identified as highly relevant (median score=7) were rated on 3 additional characteristics: cost savings (1=large, 5=none), risk-benefit profile (1=benefit >risk, 5=risk >benefit), and actionability by emergency physicians (1=complete, 5=none). Results are presented as overall means (eg, mean of subcategory means) and subcategory means with SDs. Results: Initial review of 412 recommendations identified 49 items as highly relevant to emergency care. Eleven were redundant with ACEP recommendations, leaving 38 items from 25 professional societies. Overall means for items ranged from 1.57 to 3.1. Recommendations’ scores averaged 3.2 (SD 0.6) for cost savings, 1.9 (SD 0.4) for risk-benefit, and 1.6 (SD 0.5) for actionability. The most common conditions in these recommendations were infectious diseases (14 items; 37%), head injury (4 items; 11%), and primary headache disorders (4 items; 11%). The most frequently addressed interventions were imaging studies (11 items; 29%) and antibiotics (9 items; 24%). Conclusion: Thirty-eight Choosing Wisely recommendations from other specialties are highly relevant to emergency care. Imaging studies and antibiotic use are heavily represented among them.

AB - Study objective: The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) joined the Choosing Wisely campaign in 2013 and has contributed 10 recommendations to reduce low-value care. Recommendations from other specialties may also identify opportunities to improve quality and patient safety in emergency care. The Choosing Wisely work group of the ACEP Quality and Patient Safety Committee seeks to identify and characterize the Choosing Wisely recommendations from other professional societies with the highest relevance to emergency care. Methods: In June 2016, all Choosing Wisely recommendations from other specialties were obtained from the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation. Using a modified Delphi method, the 10 group members rated recommendations for relevance on a validated 7-point scale. Recommendations identified as highly relevant (median score=7) were rated on 3 additional characteristics: cost savings (1=large, 5=none), risk-benefit profile (1=benefit >risk, 5=risk >benefit), and actionability by emergency physicians (1=complete, 5=none). Results are presented as overall means (eg, mean of subcategory means) and subcategory means with SDs. Results: Initial review of 412 recommendations identified 49 items as highly relevant to emergency care. Eleven were redundant with ACEP recommendations, leaving 38 items from 25 professional societies. Overall means for items ranged from 1.57 to 3.1. Recommendations’ scores averaged 3.2 (SD 0.6) for cost savings, 1.9 (SD 0.4) for risk-benefit, and 1.6 (SD 0.5) for actionability. The most common conditions in these recommendations were infectious diseases (14 items; 37%), head injury (4 items; 11%), and primary headache disorders (4 items; 11%). The most frequently addressed interventions were imaging studies (11 items; 29%) and antibiotics (9 items; 24%). Conclusion: Thirty-eight Choosing Wisely recommendations from other specialties are highly relevant to emergency care. Imaging studies and antibiotic use are heavily represented among them.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051800313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051800313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.06.041

DO - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.06.041

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85051800313

VL - 72

SP - 246

EP - 253

JO - Annals of Emergency Medicine

JF - Annals of Emergency Medicine

SN - 0196-0644

IS - 3

ER -