Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT03381885

Natural Experiment: "Gentle Nudge" Intervention, Eliminating Phone Call Requirement

Back pain costs the U.S. over $100 billion annually, and much of this spending is wasteful due to the overuse of advanced diagnostic imaging. Despite prominent clinical guidelines and the nationally recognized Choosing Wisely campaign discouraging use of costly and low value imaging, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) studies remain frequently overused. Real-time electronic clinical decision support (CDS) at the point of care has been increasingly emphasized as an important strategy to improve the value of back pain management; however, studies suggest that CDS at best only modestly influences practice patterns. The aim is to implement a behavioral economic-based intervention in the ED to promote the use of CDS system.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

About this study

Despite prominent clinical guidelines and the nationally recognized Choosing Wisely campaign discouraging use of costly and low value imaging, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) studies remain frequently overused. Few studies have rigorously investigated the causes of CDS' limited influence on care as well as interventions to enhance CDS' impact on reducing low value imaging. The implementation of CDS to reduce low value MRI and CT imaging studies for back pain at a large safety net health system was monitored. The CDS systems was integrated into the electronic health record system. Clinicians answered several questions and select from a list of basic imaging indications and CDS provides an American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria score. Appropriate scores ranged from 7-9, borderline scores ranging from 4-6, and inappropriate scores ranging from 1-3 (clinicians are encouraged to cancel inappropriate orders).

Electronic order data on imaging studies was pulled using CPT billable data and imaging studies were categorized as appropriate, canceled, changed, and unscored orders. Early observation of CDS implementation revealed that LAC+USC Medical Center (one of 16 sites) had high percentages of unscored orders. At this intervention site, a "nudge" grounded in behavioral economic theory (nudge=gentle incentive, preserving freedom of choice) was provided where clinicians ordering medium or high scoring studies could bypass the usual mandatory phone call to radiology. This natural experiment was evaluated using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences (DinD) analysis to measure whether high scores increased and unscored studies decreased at the intervention site vs. 15 control sites over time. Generalized linear regression models were used that accounted for clustering by practice site and adjusting for patient and clinician characteristics.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults with Lower Back Pain receiving treatment at Los Angeles Department of Health Services Facility (LAC-DHS)
  • Adults whose physicians order Imaging Studies (CT SCANs and MRIs)

Exclusion criteria

  • Non-LAC-DHS patients
  • Patient without Lower Back Pain

Treatment and study plan

Gentle Nudge

Behavioral

Clinicians ordering medium or high scoring imaging studies could bypass the usual mandatory phone call to radiology.

Usual Standard Procedure

Behavioral

Clinicians ordering imaging studies required mandatory phone to radiology

Primary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Unscored Imaging Orders

    Time frame: 6 months from the date of intervention implementation

    Change in the percentage of Unscored Imaging Orders

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percentage of Appropriate, Borderline and Inappropriate Imaging Orders

    Time frame: 6 months from the date of intervention implementation

    Change in the percentage of Appropriateness, Borderline and Inappropriate Imaging Orders

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of California, Los Angeles

Other

Collaborators

  • American Board of Internal Medicine
  • LAC+USC Medical Center
  • Los Angeles Department of Health Services

Registry information

Acronym: LBP-ED

Important dates

Study start
2015
Primary completion
2016
Study completion
2016
First posted
Dec 22, 2017
Registry last updated
Dec 22, 2017

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.