Changing Provider PSA Screening Behavior Using Best Practice Advisories: Interventional Study in a Multispecialty Group Practice

Abstract

Background

Most guidelines recommend against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men ≥ 70 years of age. Adherence to these guidelines is variable.

Objective

To determine whether the use of a “Best Practice Advisory” (BPA) intervention within the electronic medical record (EMR) system can alter the rate of PSA screening in men ≥ 70 years of age.

Design

This is an interventional study spanning the years 2013 through 2017, in men ≥ 70 years of age in Kaiser Permanente Northern California with no prior history of prostate cancer. The BPA intervention was activated in the EMR system on October 15, 2015, with no prior notice or education.

Setting

Integrated healthcare system including all Kaiser Permanente Northern California facilities.

Participants

A population-based sample that included all male members ≥ 70 years of age without a history of prostate cancer.

Main Measures

The main outcome was the rate of PSA testing in men ≥ 70 years of age. We compared the rates of PSA testing between the pre-BPA period (January 1, 2013–October 14, 2015) and the post-BPA period (October 15, 2015–December 31, 2017). An interrupted time series analysis of PSA ordering rates was performed.

Key Results

Following the 2015 BPA intervention, screening rates substantially declined from 36.0 per 100 person-years to 14.9 per 100 person-years (rate ratio = 0.415; 95% CI: 0.410–0.419). The effect of the BPA was comparable among all patient races and ordering provider specialties. The interrupted time series analysis showed a rapid, large, and sustained drop in the rate of PSA ordering, and much less temporal variation in test ordering after activation of the BPA.

Conclusion

Following activation of a BPA within the EMR, the rates of inappropriate PSA testing significantly declined by 58.5% in men ≥ 70 years of age and temporal variation was reduced.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1
Figure 2

References

  1. 1.

    Grossman DC, US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1901-1913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Qaseem A, Barry MJ, Denberg TD, Owens DK, Shekelle P, for the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians. Screening for prostate cancer: A guidance statement from the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(10):761-769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Clinical Preventive Service Recommendation. Prostate cancer screening in men aged 70 and older. Available at: https://www.aafp.org/patient-care/clinical-recommendations/all/prostate-cancer.html. Accessed August 9, 2019.

  4. 4.

    Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2013;190(2):419-426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al.. ERSPC Investigators. Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2014;384(9959):2027-2035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Draisma G, Boer R, Otto SJ, et al. Lead times and overdetection due to prostate-specific antigen screening: Estimates form the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:868-878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    HEDIS Measures and Technical Resources. Non-recommended PSA-based screening in older men. Available at: https://www.ncqa.org/hedis/measures/non-recommended-psa-based-screening-in-older-men/. Accessed August 9, 2019.

  8. 8.

    Bejjanki H, Mramba LK, Beal SG, et al. The role of a best practice alert in the electronic medical record in reducing repetitive lab tests. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2018;10:611–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Shelton JB, Ochotorena L, Bennett C, et al. Reducing PSA-based Prostate Cancer Screening in Men Aged 75 Years and Older with the Use of Highly Specific Computerized Clinical Decision Support. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(8):1133-1139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Bernal JL, Cummins S, Gasparrini A. Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46(1):348-355.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Moyer VA. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(2):120-134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    US Department of Health and Human Services. Office of the Inspector General: Medicare Payments for Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory Tests in 2017: Year 4 of Baseline Data. Available at: https://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-09-18-00410.pdf. Accessed August 9, 2019.

  13. 13.

    Prostate Biopsies Reduced Once Again in Medicare Proposed Fees for 2018. Available at: https://apsmedbill.com/whitepapers/prostate-biopsies-reduced-once-again-medicare-proposed-fees-2018. Accessed August 9, 2019.

  14. 14.

    Walraven CV, Goel V, Chan B. Effect of population-based interventions on laboratory utilization – a time-series analysis. JAMA. 1998;280:2028-2033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Lin CP, Payne TH, Nichol WP, Hoey PJ, Anderson CL, Gennari JH. Evaluating Clinical Decision Support Systems: Monitoring CPOE Order Check Override Rates in the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Computerized Patient Record System. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15:620–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Feldman LS, Shihab HM, Thiemann D, et al. Impact of Providing Fee Data on Laboratory Test Ordering A Controlled Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(10):903-908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Levick DL, Stern G, Meyerhoefer CD, Levick A, Pucklavage D. Reducing unnecessary testing in a CPOE system through implementation of a targeted CDS intervention. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13:43-49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Najafi N, Cucina R, Pierre B, Khanna R. Assessment of a targeted electronic health record intervention to reduce telemetry duration: a cluster-randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;179(1):11-15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The study was supported by The Permanente Medical Group Delivery Science and Physician Researcher Programs.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph Presti Jr MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Prior Presentations

American Urological Association Annual Meeting, May 4, 2019

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Presti, J., Alexeeff, S., Horton, B. et al. Changing Provider PSA Screening Behavior Using Best Practice Advisories: Interventional Study in a Multispecialty Group Practice. J GEN INTERN MED 35, 796–801 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-06097-2

Download citation

KEY WORDS

  • screening
  • prostate cancer
  • PSA