3.8 Article

Toward the Deimplementation of Computed Tomography Urogram for Patients With Low- to Intermediate-risk Microscopic Hematuria: A Mixed-method Study of Factors Influencing Continued Use

Journal

UROLOGY PRACTICE
Volume 10, Issue 5, Pages 511-519

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/UPJ.0000000000000429

Keywords

tomography; x-ray computed; urography; hematuria; low-value care; qualitative research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to investigate the factors contributing to the continued use of low-value CT urogram after guideline revision. The study used a mixed-method design, utilizing electronic health record data and semi-structured interviews, to examine the determinants of low-value CT urogram at a single academic tertiary medical center in the southeastern United States. The findings suggest that provider awareness of the revised guidelines, clinical judgment, and external influences play a role in the use of low-value CT urogram.
Introduction:Citing high costs, limited diagnostic benefit, and ionizing radiation-associated risk from CT urogram, in 2020 the AUA revised its guidelines from recommending CT urogram for all patients with microscopic hematuria to a deintensified risk-stratified approach, including the deimplementation of low-value CT urogram (ie, not recommending CT urogram for patients with low- to intermediate-risk microscopic hematuria). Adherence to revised guidelines and reasons for continued low-value CT urogram are unknown.Methods:With the overarching objective of improving guideline implementation, we used a mixed-method convergent explanatory design with electronic health record data for a retrospective cohort at a single academic tertiary medical center in the southeastern United States and semistructured interviews with urology and nonurology providers to describe determinants of low-value CT urogram following guideline revision.Results:Of 391 patients with microscopic hematuria, 198 (51%) had a low-value CT urogram (136 [69%] pre-guideline revision, 62 [31%] postrevision). The odds of ordering a low-value CT urogram were lower after guideline revisions, but the change was not statistically significant (OR: 0.44, P = .08); odds were 1.89 higher (P = .06) among nonurology providers than urology providers, but the difference was not statistically significant. Provider interviews suggested low-value CT urogram related to nonurology providers' limited awareness of revised guidelines, the role of clinical judgment in microscopic hematuria evaluation, and professional and patient influences.Conclusions:Our findings suggest low-value CT urogram deimplementation may be improved with guidelines and implementation support directed at both urology and nonurology providers and algorithms to support guideline-concordant microscopic hematuria evaluation approaches. Future studies should test these strategies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available