Stories

Reducing Unnecessary Screening for Vitamin D Deficiency

Stories - May 02 2017

By making minor changes to their procedures for ordering tests, health care systems can help patients get the right screenings at the right time.

More medical testing isn’t always better. In fact, according to “Choosing Wisely,” an American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) initiative, sometimes too much testing and screening leads to increased costs and unnecessary treatment. Such is the case for widespread blood testing for vitamin D deficiency. The test is expensive, and for most people the results won’t make a difference in their treatment.

Researchers estimate that overuse of health care in the U.S. accounts for 6–8% of total health care spending, and up to 29% of total Medicare spending.¹ In a sector where costs are notoriously high and resources are scarce, if health systems can reduce the unnecessary care they deliver, there will be more funds available for  needed services. In a 2014 survey of U.S. physicians, nearly three out of four said unnecessary tests and procedures are a serious problem.

Dr. Andy Felcher agrees. As physician lead for evidence-based guidelines at Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Felcher helped design a program to decrease unnecessary vitamin D deficiency screening and educate his fellow physicians about who should be screened. Felcher then asked researchers David Mosen, Rachel Gold, and Ashley Stoneburner from the Center for Health Research to evaluate the program’s effectiveness.

Their study, published online in the Journal of the American Informatics Association, is one of the first to show how changes in the electronic ordering system can reduce unnecessary vitamin D testing.

How did you get providers to stop ordering unnecessary tests?

Felcher: We started by developing a new regional guideline to educate providers on who should be tested. Then we wrote a summary of the guideline that would pop up for providers to read before they ordered the test. After reading the guidelines, the clinician could order the test, but an extra click in the electronic ordering system was necessary to do so.

We also removed a shortcut for ordering the vitamin D test from the lab ordering preference list for all clinicians except endocrinologists, nephrologists, and orthopedists—the providers who see patients who are at high risk for deficiency.

Did the changes in the ordering system work? 

Mosen: Yes. We compared the number of vitamin D screenings ordered during the six months after the intervention took place to the number ordered during the six months prior to changing the ordering system.

Total tests decreased from 74 per 1,000 members to 24 tests per, 1,000 members. Inappropriate testing decreased from 44 to 30 percent, and appropriate testing rose from 56 to 70 percent. This saved money and time for patients and the health care system, and also helped to educate patients and providers about who should be tested and who shouldn’t.  

So who should be screened for vitamin D deficiency?

Felcher: Experts disagree on what constitutes deficiency and who should be screened, but no professional group recommends that we screen everyone.

The Endocrine Society recommends screening specific groups. The US Preventive Services Task Force (PDF) says there’s not enough evidence to determine the benefits and harms of universal screening, and the “Choosing Wisely”  program says providers should avoid screening low-risk groups, including the general population.

If the experts disagree, how did you decide what screening is appropriate?   

Felcher: We reviewed the expert recommendations with our own endocrinologists and came up with a list on which most experts agree. These include patients with osteoporosis as well as patients with conditions that make it difficult for their body to absorb vitamin D. For example, patients with calcium or parathyroid disorders, malnutrition syndromes, and chronic kidney disease. Patients taking medications that interfere with vitamin D absorption should also be tested—this includes patients taking steroids, antiepileptics, and certain HIV medications.

If someone is deficient, would taking a supplement help?

Felcher: We don’t have a lot of good evidence about supplementation. Studies show that older people living in nursing facilities have fewer falls when they take vitamin D, but vitamin D supplements have not decreased the risk of having a fracture, and they have not been shown to prevent or improve other conditions like heart disease and cancer.

So what should patients do if they think they are low in vitamin D?

Felcher: Our own bodies make vitamin D when we are exposed to the sun, so if you’re in a sunny climate, go outdoors. If you live in the Pacific Northwest like I do and don’t get much sunshine, you may want to take a supplement. We don’t have strong evidence yet that supplements improve health, but there are many studies underway looking at this question, and as long as you don’t take more than 4,000 IUs a day, a vitamin D supplement is unlikely to hurt you.

If you’re going to take a vitamin D supplement, make sure to look for the USP (U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention) testing symbol on the label. This means the bottles have been inspected to make sure the amount of vitamin D listed on the bottle matches what’s actually contained in the tablet. In a prior study done at the Center for Health Research, researchers found wide variability in the potency of vitamin D supplements.

Patients can also make lifestyle changes to get more vitamin D. Patients who smoke should get help quitting because smoking is associated with lower levels of vitamin D. Patients can also increase their intake of foods rich in vitamin D—poultry, fatty fish like salmon, or foods to which vitamin D is added, such as tofu, orange juice, and some dairy products.

¹  Berwick DM, Hackbarth AD. Eliminating waste in US health care. JAMA 2012; 307: 1513—16.

Wemmberg JE, Fisher ES, Skinner JS. Geography and the debate over Medicare reform. Health Aff (Millwood)2002; (Supplemental Web Exclusives): W96-114.