| Abstract: |
Introduction:Citing high costs, limited diagnostic benefit, and ionizing radiation-associated risk from CT urogram, in 2020 the AUA revised its guidelines from recommending CT urogram for all patients with microscopic hematuria to a deintensified risk-stratified approach, including the deimplementation of low-value CT urogram (ie, not recommending CT urogram for patients with low- to intermediate-risk microscopic hematuria). Adherence to revised guidelines and reasons for continued low-value CT urogram are unknown.Methods:With the overarching objective of improving guideline implementation, we used a mixed-method convergent explanatory design with electronic health record data for a retrospective cohort at a single academic tertiary medical center in the southeastern United States and semistructured interviews with urology and nonurology providers to describe determinants of low-value CT urogram following guideline revision.Results:Of 391 patients with microscopic hematuria, 198 (51%) had a low-value CT urogram (136 [69%] pre-guideline revision, 62 [31%] postrevision). The odds of ordering a low-value CT urogram were lower after guideline revisions, but the change was not statistically significant (OR: 0.44, P =.08); odds were 1.89 higher (P =.06) among nonurology providers than urology providers, but the difference was not statistically significant. Provider interviews suggested low-value CT urogram related to nonurology providers' limited awareness of revised guidelines, the role of clinical judgment in microscopic hematuria evaluation, and professional and patient influences.Conclusions:Our findings suggest low-value CT urogram deimplementation may be improved with guidelines and implementation support directed at both urology and nonurology providers and algorithms to support guideline-concordant microscopic hematuria evaluation approaches. Future studies should test these strategies. © 2023 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved. |
