Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Nov 1;30(9):736-739.
doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzy100.

Limit, lean or listen? A typology of low-value care that gives direction in de-implementation

Affiliations

Limit, lean or listen? A typology of low-value care that gives direction in de-implementation

Eva W Verkerk et al. Int J Qual Health Care. .

Abstract

Background: Overuse of unnecessary care is widespread around the world. This so-called low-value care provides no benefit for the patient, wastes resources and can cause harm. The concept of low-value care is broad and there are different reasons for care to be of low-value. Hence, different strategies might be necessary to reduce it and awareness of this may help in designing a de-implementation strategy. Based on a literature scan and discussions with experts, we identified three types of low-value care.

Results: The type ineffective care is proven ineffective, such as antibiotics for a viral infection. Inefficient care is in essence effective, but is of low-value through inefficient provision or inappropriate intensity, such as chronic benzodiazepine use. Unwanted care is in essence appropriate for the clinical condition it targets, but is low-value since it does not fit the patients' preferences, such as a treatment aimed to cure a patient that prefers palliative care. In this paper, we argue that these three types differ in their most promising strategy for de-implementation and that our typology gives direction in choosing whether to limit, lean or listen.

Conclusion: We developed a typology that provides insight in the different reasons for care to be of low-value. We believe that this typology is helpful in designing a tailor-made strategy for reducing low-value care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart literature scan.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Typology of low-value care.

References

    1. Brownlee S, Chalkidou K, Doust J et al. Evidence for overuse of medical services around the world. Lancet 2017;390:156–68. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Keyhani S, Falk R, Howell EA et al. Overuse and systems of care: a systematic review. Med Care 2013;51:503–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Morgan DJ, Brownlee S, Leppin AL et al. Setting a research agenda for medical overuse. BMJ 2015;351:h4534. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet 2003;362:1225–30. - PubMed
    1. Berwick DM, Hackbarth AD. Eliminating waste in US health care. JAMA 2012;307:1513–6. - PubMed