Effect of Educational Intervention on the Rate of Rarely Appropriate Outpatient Echocardiograms Ordered by Attending Academic Cardiologists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Appropriate use criteria-based educational initiatives have been shown to improve transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) ordering practices of physicians in training. Whether such an intervention is successful with attending cardiologists remains unknown. Objective: To prospectively investigate the effect of an appropriate use criteria-based educational intervention on ordering of outpatient TTEs by attending academic cardiologists. Design, Setting, and Participants: We conducted a prospective, randomized clinical trial of an educational intervention designed to reduce the number of outpatient TTEs that were deemed to be rarely appropriate by published appropriate use criteria. Investigators classifying TTEs were blinded to participant groupings. The study was conducted within the cardiology division at the Massachusetts General Hospital, an academic quaternary care hospital. Staff members of the cardiology division were included; 66 cardiologists were randomized. The study was conducted from November 19, 2013, to June 1, 2014. An analysis of the evaluable population was performed. Interventions: The appropriate use criteria-based educational intervention consisted of a review lecture and electronic information card, as well as monthly individual physician feedback via email. The email described the percentage of rarely appropriate TTEs as well as the appropriate use criteria rationale for classifying studies as rarely appropriate. Main Outcomes and Measures: We hypothesized a priori that the educational intervention would reduce the number of rarely appropriate TTEs. The primary outcome was the rate of rarely appropriate TTEs. Results: Of the 66 cardiologists enrolled in the study, 65 were included in the analysis (1 intervention cardiologist retired from practice during the study). The participants' mean (SD) age was 50.6 (10.5) years; 48 (73%) were men. Following intervention, the proportion of rarely appropriate TTEs was significantly lower in the intervention vs control group (143 of 1359 [10.5%] vs 285 of 1728 [16.5%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.88]; P = .01), and there was a nonsignificant increase in the proportion of appropriate TTEs in the intervention vs control group (1054 [77.6%] vs 1244 [72.0%]; OR, 1.38 [95% CI, 0.93-2.05]; P = .11). The most common of the 428 rarely appropriate indications were routine surveillance within 3 years after prosthetic valve insertion (73 [17.1%]), routine surveillance within 1 year for moderate or severe valvular stenosis (64 [15.0%]), and routine surveillance of cardiomyopathy (45 [10.5%]) or ventricular function (36 [8.4%]). Conclusions and Relevance: An appropriate use criteria-based educational and feedback intervention reduced the number of rarely appropriate TTEs ordered by attending academic cardiologists. This strategy may be feasible to improve TTE utilization among cardiologists, and this type of intervention warrants study in other practice environments. Trial Registration: clinicalrials.gov Identifier: NCT01968642.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".