Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
LetterCorrespondence

Re: Clinical Decisions Made in Primary Care Clinics Before and After Choosing Wisely™

Joseph B. Gladwell
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine January 2016, 29 (1) 167; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2016.01.150287
Joseph B. Gladwell
Riverside Family Medicine Residency Columbus, OH
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: Joseph.Gladwell@ohiohealth.com
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

To the Editor: Kost and Genoa demonstrated that physician adherence to guidelines for 5 low-value clinical decisions improved through educational interventions.1 They concluded that “primary care physicians respond to training and publicity in low-value care.” This intervention strategy decreased physician-initiated testing that provide little clinical value. In this way, the Choosing Wisely initiative may help to achieve the health care triple aim.2 However, the authors failed to explain why there were drastic differences in responses among the intervention groups. Of the 5 clinical decisions that were targeted, 2 groups (antibiotics for acute sinusitis, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for osteoporosis screening) improved in adherence markedly, and 3 groups (cervical cancer screening, heart disease screening, back pain imaging) did not change significantly. This disparity merits thoughtful discussion and a call for further research.

The authors propose that the groups showing no improvement shared very high adherence before the intervention, “limiting the opportunity for change.” This is one plausible explanation for the lack of improvement in these 3 groups. However, there are numerous other possible explanations for the difference in improvement. Perhaps different clinical decision groups were subjected to different interventions, and thus produced different results. The article states that groups were provided with an in-person seminar or a webinar, but does not reveal which groups had each intervention. Active learning is superior to lecture for learner retention.3 If the groups that improved were given the webinar, this could account for their change. The difference may also be explained by confounding variables. Avoiding certain low-value decisions may have been reinforced outside of the study. Billboards, posters, or other resident lectures may have given publicity to the lack of value in giving antibiotics for sinusitis, for example. If residents were not exposed to similar materials on back pain, this inequality could have caused the differences found by the authors. Examining every possible reason for the difference may not have been within the authors' intent. However, the identification of different responses to their intervention strategy is important. It is a loss to allow the difference to disappear by averaging all 5 groups together.

The goal of the Choosing Wisely initiative is to expose clinical decisions whose necessity should be questioned or discussed.4 This article clearly highlights one way to help reach the initiative's goal. It shows that physicians respond to education regarding certain clinical decisions. However, it just as clearly shows that some low-value decisions did not change as a result of educational interventions. To achieve the health care triple aim, we must discover interventions that will help physicians avoid low-value testing. We cannot reach this ideal without thoughtful examination of both successful and unsuccessful interventions for low-value decisions.

Notes

  • The above letter was referred to the authors of the article in question, who offer the following reply.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Kost A,
    2. Genao I,
    3. Lee JW,
    4. Smith SR
    . Clinical decisions made in primary care clinics before and after Choosing Wisely. J Am Board Fam Med 2015;28:471–4.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    IHI triple aim initiative. Cambridge, MA: Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Available from: http://www.ihi.org/engage/initiatives/tripleaim. Accessed August 28, 2015.
  3. 3.↵
    1. Mains TE,
    2. Cofranscesco J,
    3. Milner SM,
    4. Shah NG,
    5. Goldberg H
    . The impact of audience response systems on medical student learning. Postgrad Med J 2015;91:361–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    Choosing Wisely [homepage]. Philadelphia: ABIM Foundation. c2015. Available from: www.choosingwisely.org. Accessed August 28, 2015.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family     Medicine: 29 (1)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 29, Issue 1
January-February 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Re: Clinical Decisions Made in Primary Care Clinics Before and After Choosing Wisely™
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 5 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Re: Clinical Decisions Made in Primary Care Clinics Before and After Choosing Wisely™
Joseph B. Gladwell
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jan 2016, 29 (1) 167; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2016.01.150287

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Re: Clinical Decisions Made in Primary Care Clinics Before and After Choosing Wisely™
Joseph B. Gladwell
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Jan 2016, 29 (1) 167; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2016.01.150287
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Notes
    • References
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Hepatitis C Treatment Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Among Primary Care Providers—Los Angeles County, 2023
  • Re: Factors Influencing Patient Confidence in Screening Mammography
  • Re: Physician and Advanced Practice Clinician Burnout in Rural and Urban Settings
Show more Correspondence

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire