Yael Pri-Paz Basson, Eran Neumark, Shaye Kivity, Oshrat E Tayer-Shifman
{"title":"通过教育干预减少抗核抗体 (ANA) 检测的过度使用:一项在内科和神经科进行的研究。","authors":"Yael Pri-Paz Basson, Eran Neumark, Shaye Kivity, Oshrat E Tayer-Shifman","doi":"10.1007/s10067-024-07180-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction/objectives: </strong>Overuse of antinuclear antibody (ANA) tests leads to increased costs, false positives, and unnecessary treatments. This study evaluated ANA overuse in internal medicine and neurology departments and assessed the impact of an educational intervention.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This quality improvement educational intervention study examined ANA test overuse in five internal medicine departments and one neurology department at a university-affiliated medical center. The educational intervention included a session focusing on ANA testing appropriateness. Outcome measures comprised the ANA/new patient ratio (APR) and the percentage of positive ANA test results. Outcomes were compared between the pre- and post-intervention periods (both 6 months).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intervention took place in December 2021. The APR decreased from 43% in the pre-educational intervention period to 27% in the post-intervention period in the neurology department (odds ratio [OR] 0.49, confidence interval [95% CI] 0.37-0.63, P < 0.0001) and from 2.6% to 2.2% in the internal medicine departments (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73-1.10, P = 0.28). The percentage of positive ANA tests increased from 43% pre-intervention to 53% in the post-intervention period (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.90-2.46, P = 0.12) in the neurology department and from 48% to 59% (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.99-2.44, P = 0.0543) in the internal medicine departments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A simple educational intervention reduced unnecessary ANA testing in the neurology department but not in internal medicine departments, improving patient selection and potential cost savings. The results underscore the importance of targeted education to promote evidence-based behavior among healthcare professionals. Further research with longer follow-up is needed to assess the sustainability of these improvements.</p>","PeriodicalId":10482,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rheumatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mitigating overuse of antinuclear antibody (ANA) testing through educational intervention: a study in internal medicine and neurology departments.\",\"authors\":\"Yael Pri-Paz Basson, Eran Neumark, Shaye Kivity, Oshrat E Tayer-Shifman\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10067-024-07180-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction/objectives: </strong>Overuse of antinuclear antibody (ANA) tests leads to increased costs, false positives, and unnecessary treatments. This study evaluated ANA overuse in internal medicine and neurology departments and assessed the impact of an educational intervention.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This quality improvement educational intervention study examined ANA test overuse in five internal medicine departments and one neurology department at a university-affiliated medical center. The educational intervention included a session focusing on ANA testing appropriateness. Outcome measures comprised the ANA/new patient ratio (APR) and the percentage of positive ANA test results. Outcomes were compared between the pre- and post-intervention periods (both 6 months).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intervention took place in December 2021. The APR decreased from 43% in the pre-educational intervention period to 27% in the post-intervention period in the neurology department (odds ratio [OR] 0.49, confidence interval [95% CI] 0.37-0.63, P < 0.0001) and from 2.6% to 2.2% in the internal medicine departments (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73-1.10, P = 0.28). The percentage of positive ANA tests increased from 43% pre-intervention to 53% in the post-intervention period (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.90-2.46, P = 0.12) in the neurology department and from 48% to 59% (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.99-2.44, P = 0.0543) in the internal medicine departments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A simple educational intervention reduced unnecessary ANA testing in the neurology department but not in internal medicine departments, improving patient selection and potential cost savings. The results underscore the importance of targeted education to promote evidence-based behavior among healthcare professionals. Further research with longer follow-up is needed to assess the sustainability of these improvements.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Rheumatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Rheumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-024-07180-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-024-07180-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导言/目的:过度使用抗核抗体(ANA)检测会导致成本增加、假阳性和不必要的治疗。本研究评估了内科和神经科的 ANA 过度使用情况,并评估了教育干预措施的影响:这项质量改进教育干预研究调查了一所大学附属医疗中心的五个内科和一个神经科的 ANA 检测过度使用情况。教育干预包括一个以 ANA 检测适当性为重点的环节。结果测量包括 ANA/新患者比率 (APR) 和 ANA 检测结果呈阳性的百分比。结果在干预前和干预后(均为 6 个月)进行了比较:干预于 2021 年 12 月进行。神经内科的APR从教育干预前的43%降至干预后的27%(几率比[OR] 0.49,置信区间[95% CI] 0.37-0.63,P 结论:简单的教育干预减少了不必要的ANA检测:一项简单的教育干预措施减少了神经内科不必要的 ANA 检测,但没有减少内科不必要的 ANA 检测,从而改善了患者的选择并节约了潜在的成本。结果强调了有针对性的教育对促进医护人员循证行为的重要性。还需要进行更长时间的跟踪研究,以评估这些改进的可持续性。
Mitigating overuse of antinuclear antibody (ANA) testing through educational intervention: a study in internal medicine and neurology departments.
Introduction/objectives: Overuse of antinuclear antibody (ANA) tests leads to increased costs, false positives, and unnecessary treatments. This study evaluated ANA overuse in internal medicine and neurology departments and assessed the impact of an educational intervention.
Method: This quality improvement educational intervention study examined ANA test overuse in five internal medicine departments and one neurology department at a university-affiliated medical center. The educational intervention included a session focusing on ANA testing appropriateness. Outcome measures comprised the ANA/new patient ratio (APR) and the percentage of positive ANA test results. Outcomes were compared between the pre- and post-intervention periods (both 6 months).
Results: The intervention took place in December 2021. The APR decreased from 43% in the pre-educational intervention period to 27% in the post-intervention period in the neurology department (odds ratio [OR] 0.49, confidence interval [95% CI] 0.37-0.63, P < 0.0001) and from 2.6% to 2.2% in the internal medicine departments (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73-1.10, P = 0.28). The percentage of positive ANA tests increased from 43% pre-intervention to 53% in the post-intervention period (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.90-2.46, P = 0.12) in the neurology department and from 48% to 59% (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.99-2.44, P = 0.0543) in the internal medicine departments.
Conclusion: A simple educational intervention reduced unnecessary ANA testing in the neurology department but not in internal medicine departments, improving patient selection and potential cost savings. The results underscore the importance of targeted education to promote evidence-based behavior among healthcare professionals. Further research with longer follow-up is needed to assess the sustainability of these improvements.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Rheumatology is an international English-language journal devoted to publishing original clinical investigation and research in the general field of rheumatology with accent on clinical aspects at postgraduate level.
The journal succeeds Acta Rheumatologica Belgica, originally founded in 1945 as the official journal of the Belgian Rheumatology Society. Clinical Rheumatology aims to cover all modern trends in clinical and experimental research as well as the management and evaluation of diagnostic and treatment procedures connected with the inflammatory, immunologic, metabolic, genetic and degenerative soft and hard connective tissue diseases.