Search

Background: Vitamin tests are increasingly ordered by GPs, but a clinical and evidence-based indication is often lacking. Harnessing technology (that is, decision support tools and redesigning request forms) have been shown to reduce vitamin requests. Aim: To investigate whether the number of vitamin tests may be reduced by providing a multi-level intervention programme based on training, monitoring, and feedback. Design & setting: This was a cluster randomised intervention study performed in 26 primary care health centres (>195 000 patients) in the Netherlands. The relative reduction in ordered vitamin D and B12 tests was determined after introduction of two de-implementation strategies (1 May 2017 to 30 April 2018). Method: Health centres randomised to de-implementation strategy 1 received education and benchmarking of their own vitamin test ordering behaviour every 3 months. Health centres in de-implementation strategy 2 received the same education and benchmarking, but supplemented with educational material for patients. Results: The number of vitamin D tests decreased by 23% compared to the 1-year pre-intervention period (1 May 2016 to 30 April 2017). For vitamin B12 tests an overall reduction of 20% was found. Provision of patient educational information showed additional value over training and benchmarking of GPs alone for vitamin D test ordering (10% extra reduction, odds ratio [OR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83 to 0.92), but not for vitamin B12 ordering (4% extra reduction, OR 0.96, 95% CI = 0.91 to 1.02). Nationwide, this would result in over €3 200 000 in savings on healthcare expenditure a year. Conclusion: A structured intervention programme, including training and benchmarking of GPs regarding their diagnostic test ordering, resulted in a significant reduction in ordered vitamin tests. Additional information provision to patients resulted in a small but still relevant additional reduction. If implemented on a national level, a substantial cost saving could be achieved.

Background: Diagnosing heart failure (HF) is difficult, relying on medical history, symptoms, and signs only. Clinical guidelines recommend natriuretic peptides (NPs) as an additional diagnostic test, notably to exclude HF in suspected patients. NP testing has been available since 2003 for primary care in the Netherlands, but little is known about its uptake. Aim: To evaluate the trend in ordering and appropriateness of NP testing in primary care. Design & setting: An observational study was performed between January 2005 and December 2013. Nine Dutch general practices participated, with 21 000 registered people (approximately 4300 aged ≥65 years). Method: The total number of patients undergoing NP testing each year was calculated per 1000 patient years (PY) based on the total practice population. NP levels were used to assess whether NP testing was applied to exclude or confirm HF. Results: The number of NP testing increased from 2.5 per 1000 PY in 2005 to 14.0 per 1000 PY in 2013, with a peak in 2009 of 15.6 per 1000 PY. The proportion of participants with N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) below 125 pg/ml (the exclusionary threshold recommended by the European Society of Cardiology [ESC] guidelines on HF) was on average 30%, and highest in the first year (47%). Conclusion: After a rapid uptake of NP testing in primary care from 2005 onwards, the use of it seemed to stabilise after 2009, thus leaving patients who are prone to HF without an optimal diagnostic work-up.