Strategies for Reducing Regional Variation in the Use of Surgery: A Systematic Review

Objective:To review the literature evaluating the effect of practice guidelines and decision aids on use of surgery and regional variation. Background:The use of surgical procedures varies widely across geographic regions. Although practice guidelines and decision aids have been promoted for reducing variation, their true effectiveness is uncertain. Methods:Studies evaluating the influence of clinical practice guidelines or consensus statements, shared decision making and decision aids, or provider feedback of comparative utilization, on rates of surgical procedures were identified through literature searches of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Results:A total of 1946 studies were identified and 27 were included in the final review. Of the 12 studies evaluating implementation of guidelines, 6 reported a significant effect. Those examining overall population-based rates had mixed effects, but all studies evaluating procedure choice described at least a small increase in use of recommended therapy. Three of 5 studies examining the effect of guidelines on regional variation reported a significant reduction after dissemination. Of the 15 studies examining decision aids, 5 revealed significant effects. Many studies of decision aids reported decreases in population-based procedure rates. Nearly all studies evaluating the impact of decision aids on procedure choice reported increases in rates of less invasive procedures. Only one study of decision aids assessed changes in regional variation and found mixed results. Conclusions:Both practice guidelines and decision aids have been proven effective in many clinical contexts. Expanding the clinical scope of these tools and eliminating barriers to implementation will be essential to further efforts directed toward reducing regional variation in the use of surgery.

[1]  P. Tugwell,et al.  The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses , 2014 .

[2]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  Decision Aids for Patients Facing a Surgical Treatment Decision: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis , 2013, Annals of surgery.

[3]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[4]  Carolyn Rutter,et al.  Introducing decision aids at Group Health was linked to sharply lower hip and knee surgery rates and costs. , 2012, Health affairs.

[5]  V. Brouwere,et al.  Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section: RHL commentary [comment] , 2012 .

[6]  C. Koning,et al.  An increased utilisation rate and better compliance to guidelines for primary radiotherapy for breast cancer from 1997 till 2008: a population-based study in the Netherlands. , 2011, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[7]  Emma Tavender,et al.  Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[8]  K. Gregory,et al.  Nonclinical factors affecting women's access to trial of labor after cesarean delivery. , 2011, Clinics in perinatology.

[9]  Christian D Helfrich,et al.  A critical synthesis of literature on the promoting action on research implementation in health services (PARIHS) framework , 2010, Implementation Science : IS.

[10]  Glyn Elwyn,et al.  Implementing shared decision making in the NHS Creation of a platform of tools to provide information to doctors and patients should be the first step in giving patients choice about their treatment , say , 2010 .

[11]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[12]  H. Fukuda,et al.  Change in clinical practice after publication of guidelines on breast cancer treatment. , 2009, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[13]  A. Busato,et al.  Regional variation in orthopedic surgery in Switzerland. , 2009, Health & place.

[14]  N. Ditsch,et al.  Contextual factors in shared decision making: a randomised controlled trial in women with a strong suspicion of breast cancer , 2009, British Journal of Cancer.

[15]  Suzanne O'Neill,et al.  Randomized trial of a decision aid for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers: impact on measures of decision making and satisfaction. , 2009, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[16]  J. Skinner,et al.  Improving Quality and Curbing Health Care Spending: Opportunities for the Congress and the Obama Administration , 2008 .

[17]  Julian P T Higgins,et al.  Commentary: Heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be expected and appropriately quantified. , 2008, International journal of epidemiology.

[18]  D. Altman,et al.  Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies , 2008 .

[19]  Tom Fahey,et al.  Effectiveness of a Computerized Decision Aid in Primary Care on Decision Making and Quality of Life in Menorrhagia: Results of the MENTIP Randomized Controlled Trial , 2007, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[20]  J. Weinstein,et al.  Informed patient choice: patient-centered valuing of surgical risks and benefits. , 2007, Health affairs.

[21]  Karen R. Sepucha,et al.  Toward the 'tipping point': decision aids and informed patient choice. , 2007, Health affairs.

[22]  George Tomlinson,et al.  Randomized, controlled trial of an interactive videodisc decision aid for patients with ischemic heart disease , 2000, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[23]  H. Møller,et al.  Trends in the treatment of breast cancer in Southeast England following the introduction of national guidelines. , 2006, Journal of public health.

[24]  J. Kirk,et al.  A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Decision Aid for Women at Increased Risk of Ovarian Cancer , 2006, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[25]  J M Grimshaw,et al.  Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies , 2004, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[26]  R. Hurskainen,et al.  A randomized trial among women with heavy menstruation – impact of a decision aid on treatment outcomes and costs , 2004, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[27]  R. Taylor,et al.  Increased rates of ENT surgery among young children: Have clinical guidelines made a difference? , 2004, Journal of paediatrics and child health.

[28]  H. Redmond,et al.  A review of clinical guidelines , 2004, The British journal of surgery.

[29]  Amiram Gafni,et al.  Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial. , 2004, JAMA.

[30]  T. Tammela,et al.  A randomized trial of choice of treatment in prostate cancer: the effect of intervention on the treatment chosen , 2004, BJU international.

[31]  Xianglin L. Du,et al.  What drove changes in the use of breast conserving surgery since the early 1980s? The role of the clinical trial, celebrity action and an NIH consensus statement , 2000, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[32]  Ingram Olkin,et al.  Adjusting for publication bias in the presence of heterogeneity , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[33]  R. Thomson,et al.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. , 2003, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[34]  Mark J Sculpher,et al.  Effects of decision aids for menorrhagia on treatment choices, health outcomes, and costs: a randomized controlled trial. , 2002, JAMA.

[35]  M. Brownell.  Tonsillectomy Rates for Manitoba Children: Temporal and Spatial Variations , 2002, Healthcare management forum.

[36]  N. Black,et al.  Reduction in the use of surgery for glue ear: did national guidelines have an impact? , 2002, Quality & safety in health care.

[37]  Elliott S Fisher,et al.  Geography and the debate over Medicare reform. , 2002, Health affairs.

[38]  J. Mason,et al.  Impact of Effective Health Care bulletin on treatment of persistent glue ear in children: time series analysis , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[39]  A Coulter,et al.  Randomised controlled trial of an interactive multimedia decision aid on benign prostatic hypertrophy in primary care , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[40]  P M Bossuyt,et al.  Decision support for patients with early-stage breast cancer: effects of an interactive breast cancer CDROM on treatment decision, satisfaction, and quality of life. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[41]  R A Deyo,et al.  Helping Patients Decide About Back Surgery: A Randomized Trial of an Interactive Video Program , 2001, Spine.

[42]  R. Hoffmann,et al.  Relation between appropriateness of primary therapy for earlystage breast carcinoma and increased use of breast-conserving surgery , 2000, The Lancet.

[43]  R A Deyo,et al.  Involving Patients in Clinical Decisions: Impact of an Interactive Video Program on Use of Back Surgery , 2000, Medical care.

[44]  I. Olkin,et al.  Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology - A proposal for reporting , 2000 .

[45]  E. White,et al.  Breast conservation therapy in the United States following the 1990 National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference on the treatment of patients with early stage invasive breast carcinoma , 1999, Cancer.

[46]  A Gafni,et al.  Mastectomy or lumpectomy? Helping women make informed choices. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[47]  M. Banerjee,et al.  Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures , 1999 .

[48]  A Kitson,et al.  Enabling the implementation of evidence based practice: a conceptual framework. , 1998, Quality in health care : QHC.

[49]  M. Starling,et al.  A randomized controlled trial of information‐giving to patients referred for coronary angiography: effects on outcomes of care , 1998, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[50]  Russell S. Kirby,et al.  The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care , 1998 .

[51]  B. Fervers,et al.  Impact of a clinical guidelines program for breast and colon cancer in a French cancer center. , 1997, JAMA.

[52]  D. Thomas,et al.  Change in the use of breast-conserving surgery in western Washington after the 1990 NIH Consensus Development Conference. , 1997, Archives of surgery.

[53]  R. Street,et al.  Increasing patient involvement in choosing treatment for early breast cancer , 1995, Cancer.

[54]  E H Wagner,et al.  The Effect of a Shared Decisionmaking Program on Rates of Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Pilot Results , 1995, Medical Care.

[55]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Achieving health gain through clinical guidelines II: Ensuring guidelines change medical practice. , 1994, Quality in health care : QHC.

[56]  J M Grimshaw,et al.  Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations. , 1994, Lancet.

[57]  J. Samet,et al.  Geographic variation in the treatment of localized breast cancer. , 1992, The New England journal of medicine.

[58]  A B Nattinger,et al.  Geographic variation in the use of breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer. , 1992, The New England journal of medicine.

[59]  A. Potosky,et al.  The Consensus Development Program: Detecting Changes in Medical Practice Following A Consensus Conference on the Treatment of Prostate Cancer , 1992, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[60]  D. Kanouse,et al.  Changing practice patterns in the management of primary breast cancer: Consensus Development Program. , 1990, Health services research.

[61]  D. Hanley,et al.  Dealing with geographic variations in the use of hospitals. The experience of the Maine Medical Assessment Foundation Orthopaedic Study Group. , 1990, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[62]  K. Kahn,et al.  Physician ratings of appropriate indications for six medical and surgical procedures. , 1986, American journal of public health.

[63]  D M Eddy,et al.  Variations in physician practice: the role of uncertainty. , 1984, Health affairs.

[64]  J. Wennberg,et al.  Dealing with medical practice variations: a proposal for action. , 1984, Health affairs.

[65]  P. Clifford,et al.  Small-area variations in the use of common surgical procedures: an international comparison of New England, England, and Norway. , 1982, The New England journal of medicine.

[66]  Wennberg Je,et al.  A test of consumer contribution to small area variations in health care delivery. , 1977 .

[67]  A. Gittelsohn,et al.  Changes in tonsillectomy rates associated with feedback and review. , 1977, Pediatrics.

[68]  F. J. Fowler,et al.  A test of consumer contribution to small area variations in health care delivery. , 1977, The Journal of the Maine Medical Association.

[69]  A. Gittelsohn,et al.  Small Area Variations in Health Care Delivery , 1973, Science.

[70]  E. Vayda.  A comparison of surgical rates in Canada and in England and Wales. , 1973, The New England journal of medicine.

[71]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[72]  A Dartmouth Atlas Project Topic Brief Preference-sensitive Care , 2022 .