Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T03:29:28.463Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

P068: Developing a standardized knowledge dissemination tool for communicating the need for Choosing Wisely© in Alberta’s emergency departments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2016

L. Krebs
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
C. Villa-Roel
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
M. Ospina
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
B.R. Holroyd
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
B.H. Rowe
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Introduction: Standardized tools for disseminating knowledge summaries of low value or unnecessary care (e.g., testing, procedures and treatments) are limited, but needed to equip clinicians for discussions with patients about care decisions. The objective of this study is to assess the acceptability of a tool developed by our emergency department (ED) team to communicate the evidence supporting the Choosing Wisely Canada© (CWC) and other similar recommendations. Methods: A consensus process was used by team members to develop a tool that highlights three areas: Facts, Gaps, and Acts. The Facts portion highlights the current state of knowledge and illustrates the strength of the evidence supporting guideline recommendations. The Gaps section identifies variation in current clinical practice. The Acts section includes larger CWC goals, as well as specific next steps for a demonstration project. Each section contains one key message for clinicians, ensuring the tool is easy to use. Results: A test case has been developed for avoiding chest radiographs in patients with an exacerbation of documented asthma. The Facts section reviewed current guidelines for asthma care. The Gaps section collated evidence from a systematic review and primary research. The Acts section recapitulates the CWC recommendations. In order to assess acceptability feedback cycle will be completed using surveys of 50 patients and 50 clinicians. Conclusion: While generating the Facts, Gaps, and Acts tool for a CWC recommendation represents a translational activity, evidence of effectiveness is needed prior to widespread implementation. We report the rational and development of a novel tool to engage clinicians and patients in conversations about unnecessary care in the ED.

Type
Posters Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2016