Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 May 1;179(5):648-657.
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.8358.

Evaluation of an Intervention to Reduce Low-Value Preoperative Care for Patients Undergoing Cataract Surgery at a Safety-Net Health System

Affiliations

Evaluation of an Intervention to Reduce Low-Value Preoperative Care for Patients Undergoing Cataract Surgery at a Safety-Net Health System

John N Mafi et al. JAMA Intern Med. .

Abstract

Importance: Preoperative testing for cataract surgery epitomizes low-value care and still occurs frequently, even at one of the nation's largest safety-net health systems.

Objective: To evaluate a multipronged intervention to reduce low-value preoperative care for patients undergoing cataract surgery and analyze costs from various fiscal perspectives.

Design, setting, and participants: This study took place at 2 academic safety-net medical centers, Los Angeles County and University of Southern California (LAC-USC) (intervention, n = 469) and Harbor-UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) (control, n = 585), from April 13, 2015, through April 12, 2016, with 12 additional months (April 13, 2016, through April 13, 2017) to assess sustainability (intervention, n = 1002; control, n = 511). To compare pre- and postintervention vs control group utilization and cost changes, logistic regression assessing time-by-group interactions was used.

Interventions: Using plan-do-study-act cycles, a quality improvement nurse reviewed medical records and engaged the anesthesiology and ophthalmology chiefs with data on overuse; all 3 educated staff and trainees on reducing routine preoperative care.

Main outcomes and measures: Percentage of patients undergoing cataract surgery with preoperative medical visits, chest x-rays, laboratory tests, and electrocardiograms. Costs were estimated from LAC-USC's financially capitated perspective, and costs were simulated from fee-for-service (FFS) health system and societal perspectives.

Results: Of 1054 patients, 546 (51.8%) were female (mean [SD] age, 60.6 [11.1] years). Preoperative visits decreased from 93% to 24% in the intervention group and increased from 89% to 91% in the control group (between-group difference, -71%; 95% CI, -80% to -62%). Chest x-rays decreased from 90% to 24% in the intervention group and increased from 75% to 83% in the control group (between-group difference, -75%; 95% CI, -86% to -65%). Laboratory tests decreased from 92% to 37% in the intervention group and decreased from 98% to 97% in the control group (between-group difference, -56%; 95% CI, -64% to -48%). Electrocardiograms decreased from 95% to 29% in the intervention group and increased from 86% to 94% in the control group (between-group difference, -74%; 95% CI, -83% to -65%). During 12-month follow-up, visits increased in the intervention group to 67%, but chest x-rays (12%), laboratory tests (28%), and electrocardiograms (11%) remained low (P < .001 for all time-group interactions in both periods). At LAC-USC, losses of $42 241 in year 1 were attributable to intervention costs, and 3-year projections estimated $67 241 in savings. In a simulation of a FFS health system at 3 years, $88 151 in losses were estimated, and for societal 3-year perspectives, $217 322 in savings were estimated.

Conclusions and relevance: This intervention was associated with sustained reductions in low-value preoperative testing among patients undergoing cataract surgery and modest cost savings for the health system. The findings suggest that reducing low-value care may be associated with cost savings for financially capitated health systems and society but also with losses for FFS health systems, highlighting a potential barrier to eliminating low-value care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Mafi reported receiving grants from the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation Choosing Wisely, grants from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and grant KL2TR001882 from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Center for Advancing Translational Science Institute. Drs Godoy-Travieso and Wei reported receiving grants from American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation Choosing Wisely during the conduct of the study. Dr Berry reported receiving support not directly related to the scope of this work from grant K08CA232344 from the National Cancer Institute, NIH, the Wright Foundation, Knights Templar Eye Foundation, the Larry and Celia Moh Foundation, and the Institute for Families Inc at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and an unrestricted departmental grant from Research to Prevent Blindness. Dr Damberg reported receiving grant 1U19HS024067-01 from the Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research. Dr Sarkisian reported receiving grants from the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation, the NIH/National Institute on Aging, grant 1K24AG047899-01 from the National Institute on Aging Midcareer Investigator Awards in Patient-Oriented Research, grant 2P30AG081684 from the NIH/National Institute on Aging UCLA Resource Center for Minority Aging Research/Center for Health Improvement of Minority Elders, and grants from the NIH/National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Multicomponent Intervention Timeline
Further details on the intervention are given in the eAppendix in the Supplement. LVN indicates licensed vocational nurse; PDSA, plan-do-study-act; QI, quality improvement.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Unadjusted Percentage of Patients Receiving Preoperative Care
LAC-USC indicates Los Angeles County and University of Southern California.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) National health expenditure fact sheet. 2018; https://www.cms.gov/research-statistics-data-and-systems/statistics-tren.... Accessed November 27, 2018.
    1. Fisher ES, Wennberg DE, Stukel TA, Gottlieb DJ, Lucas FL, Pinder EL. The implications of regional variations in Medicare spending, part 1: the content, quality, and accessibility of care. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(4):273-287. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-4-200302180-00006 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Berwick DM, Hackbarth AD. Eliminating waste in US health care. JAMA. 2012;307(14):1513-1516. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.362 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine. Best Care at Lower Cost: The Path to Continuously Learning Health Care in America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2013. - PubMed
    1. Blumenthal D, Davis K, Guterman S. Medicare at 50—moving forward. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(7):671-677. doi:10.1056/NEJMhpr1414856 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms