Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T22:54:31.695Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

P071: Choosing Wisely in the emergency department: exploring the reach, support and potential for the Choosing Wisely Canada® campaign among emergency physicians

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2017

L. Krebs*
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
L.B. Chartier
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
B.R. Holroyd
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
S. Dowling
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
A.H. Cheng
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
C. Villa-Roel
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
S.G. Campbell
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
S. Couperthwaite
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
B.H. Rowe
Affiliation:
University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB
*
*Corresponding authors

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Introduction: Choosing Wisely Canada® (CWC) launched in April 2012. Since then, the Emergency Medicine (EM) top-10 list of tests, treatments and procedures to avoid has been released and initiatives are on-going. This study explored CWC awareness and support among emergency physicians. Methods: A 60-question online survey was distributed to Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) members with valid e-mails. The survey collected information on demographics, awareness/support for CWC as well as physicians’ perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation. Descriptive statistics were performed in SPSS (Version 24). Results: Overall, 324 surveys were completed (response rate: 18%). Respondents were more often male (64%) and practiced at academic/tertiary care hospitals (56%) with mixed patient populations (74%) with annual ED volumes of >50,000 (70%). Respondents were familiar with campaigns to improve care (90%). Among these respondents, 98% were specifically familiar with CWC and 73% felt these campaigns assisted them in providing high-quality care. Respondents felt that the top-5 EM recommendations were supported by high quality evidence, specifically the first 4 recommendations (>90% each). The most frequently reported barriers to implementation were: patients’ expectations/requests (33%), the possibility of missing severe condition(s) (20%), and requirements of ED consultations (12%). Potential facilitators were identified as: strong evidence-base for recommendations (37%), medico-legal protection for clinicians who adhere to guidelines (13%), and support from institutional leadership (11%). Conclusion: CWC is well-known and supported by emergency physicians. Despite the low response rate, exploring the barriers and facilitators identified here could enhance CWC’s uptake in Canadian emergency departments.

Type
Poster Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2017