Drivers for low-value imaging: a qualitative study of stakeholders’ perspectives in Norway

Abstract

Background One kind of overutilization of diagnostic imaging is low-value imaging, i.e., imaging that does not lead to altered clinical pathways or improved health outcomes. Despite having well-documented extension and consequences, low-value imaging is still widespread. The objective of this study was to identify the drivers for the use of low-value imaging in the Norwegian healthcare services. Methods We conducted individual, semi-structured interviews among representatives from the health authorities, general practitioners, specialists working in hospitals, radiologists, radiographers, and managers of imaging departments. Data analysis was carried out in line with framework analysis consisting of five steps: Familiarization, indexing, charting, mapping, and interpretation. Results The analysis included 27 participants and resulted in two themes. The stakeholders identified drivers in the healthcare system and in the interaction between radiologists, referrers, and patients. The identified drivers were categorized in sub-themes, such as organization, communication, competence, expectations, defensive medicine, roles and responsibilities, and referral quality and time constraints. The drivers interact with each other and may strengthen the effect of other drivers. Conclusions Several drivers for low-value imaging in Norway were identified at all levels of the healthcare system. The drivers work simultaneously and synergistically. To free resources for high-value imaging, drivers should be targeted by appropriate measures at several levels to reduce low-value imaging.

Moral distress among physicians in Norway: a longitudinal study

“…Studies show multiple and strong drivers for providing diagnostics and therapy without effect, and less experienced physicians are the ones who order the most unnecessary tests and are less likely to withhold or withdraw treatment. 39 40 Our study confirms this as the youngest physicians report the highest moral distress related to providing care without documented effect and to patients who cry the loudest. This might reflect their self-consciousness and internal struggle when acting against what they know is the fairest distribution.…”

Resource conflicts leading to moral distress: A longitudinal study among physicians in Norway

“…In 2021 and 2004, almost half of our respondents found it very or somewhat distressing that futile treatment is still given. Studies show multiple and strong drivers for providing diagnostics and therapy without effect, and less experienced physicians are the ones who order the most unnecessary tests and are less likely to withhold or withdraw treatment [36,37]. Our study confirms this as the youngest physicians report the highest moral distress related to providing care without documented effect and to patients who cry the loudest.…”

Can we nudge to reduce the perioperative low value care? Decision making factors influencing safe practice implementation

“…These patients, probably due to risk aversion, express their preference for defensive medicine to increase their perceived control. Physicians frequently face the effort of explaining to a patient that the advantages of avoiding a test or a procedure are bigger than performing it [30]. In this regard, building a confidence climate between patient and clinician may help reducing LVC as most patients usually accept that the recommended care by their clinicians [31].…”