Reducing vitamin D requests in a primary care cohort: a quality improvement study.
cost savings
general practice
general practitioners
primary healthcare
vitamin D
Journal
BJGP open
ISSN: 2398-3795
Titre abrégé: BJGP Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101713531
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2020
Dec 2020
Historique:
received:
29
09
2019
accepted:
06
01
2020
pubmed:
5
11
2020
medline:
5
11
2020
entrez:
4
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Since 2000, vitamin D requests have increased 2-6 fold with no evidence of a corresponding improvement in the health of the population. The ease of vitamin D requesting may contribue to the rapid rise in its demand and, hence, pragmatic interventions to reduce vitamin D test ordering are warranted. To study the effect on vitamin D requests following a redesign of the electronic forms used in primary care. In addition, any potential harms were studied and the potential cost-savings associated with the intervention were evaluated. An interventional study took place within primary care across Leicestershire, England. The intervention was a redesign of the electronic laboratory request form for primary care practitioners across the county. Data were collected on vitamin D requests for a 6-month period prior to the change (October 2016 to March 2017) and the corresponding 6-month period post-intervention (October 2017 to March 2018), data were also collected on vitamin D, calcium, and phosphate levels. The number of requests for vitamin D decreased by 14 918 (36.2%) following the intervention. Changes in the median calcium and phosphate were not clinically significant. Cost-modelling suggested that if such an intervention was implemented across primary care in the UK, there would be a potential annual saving to the NHS of £38 712 606. A simple pragmatic redesign of the electronic request form for vitamin D test led to a significant reduction in vitamin D requests without any adverse effect on the quality of care.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Since 2000, vitamin D requests have increased 2-6 fold with no evidence of a corresponding improvement in the health of the population. The ease of vitamin D requesting may contribue to the rapid rise in its demand and, hence, pragmatic interventions to reduce vitamin D test ordering are warranted.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To study the effect on vitamin D requests following a redesign of the electronic forms used in primary care. In addition, any potential harms were studied and the potential cost-savings associated with the intervention were evaluated.
DESIGN & SETTING
METHODS
An interventional study took place within primary care across Leicestershire, England.
METHOD
METHODS
The intervention was a redesign of the electronic laboratory request form for primary care practitioners across the county. Data were collected on vitamin D requests for a 6-month period prior to the change (October 2016 to March 2017) and the corresponding 6-month period post-intervention (October 2017 to March 2018), data were also collected on vitamin D, calcium, and phosphate levels.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The number of requests for vitamin D decreased by 14 918 (36.2%) following the intervention. Changes in the median calcium and phosphate were not clinically significant. Cost-modelling suggested that if such an intervention was implemented across primary care in the UK, there would be a potential annual saving to the NHS of £38 712 606.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
A simple pragmatic redesign of the electronic request form for vitamin D test led to a significant reduction in vitamin D requests without any adverse effect on the quality of care.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33144362
pii: bjgpopen20X101090
doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101090
pmc: PMC7880195
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020, The Authors.
Références
Ann Clin Biochem. 2012 Jul;49(Pt 4):323-36
pubmed: 22734074
Int J Med Inform. 2009 Oct;78(10):639-44
pubmed: 19556162
BMJ. 2018 Nov 28;363:k4666
pubmed: 30487169
N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 10;375(19):1817-1820
pubmed: 27959647
JAMA. 1983 Jun 10;249(22):3076-80
pubmed: 6854832
N Engl J Med. 2011 Dec 29;365(26):e48
pubmed: 22168591
CMAJ Open. 2017 Jan 17;5(1):E36-E39
pubmed: 28401116
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Jan;24(1):172-175
pubmed: 27107453
Med Care. 1992 Mar;30(3):189-98
pubmed: 1538607
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017 Feb 20;17(1):20
pubmed: 28219437
London J Prim Care (Abingdon). 2015;7(2):15-22
pubmed: 26217398
J Clin Pathol. 2005 Aug;58(8):853-5
pubmed: 16049288
J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2017 Jul 13;7(3):168-172
pubmed: 28808509
Am Fam Physician. 2018 Feb 15;97(4):226-227
pubmed: 29671531
BMJ. 2016 Nov 23;355:i6201
pubmed: 27881372
Nutrients. 2018 Apr 16;10(4):
pubmed: 29659534
N Engl J Med. 1993 Oct 21;329(17):1271-3
pubmed: 8413397
Geriatr Psychol Neuropsychiatr Vieil. 2016 Dec 1;14(4):377-382
pubmed: 27818369
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Jul 1;24(4):776-780
pubmed: 28339692
Am Fam Physician. 2018 Feb 15;97(4):254-260
pubmed: 29671532
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Feb;95(7):e2783
pubmed: 26886626
J Clin Pathol. 2016 Sep;69(9):777-83
pubmed: 26837314
Ann Intern Med. 2004 Aug 3;141(3):196-204
pubmed: 15289216
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985 Feb 16;290(6467):488-90
pubmed: 3918644
BMJ. 2002 Mar 30;324(7340):783
pubmed: 11924663