SEVENTEEN YEARS to translate research into practice. This lag has long been cited as the amount of time before new science is adopted into practice.2 More recently, the lag has been downgraded—but only to 15 years.3 In addition to this research-to-practice gap, Garrow4 estimated that of 2500 treatments with good evidence, 15% were beneficial, 22% likely beneficial, 7% partially beneficial/harmful, 5% unlikely beneficial, 4% likely ineffective or harmful, with the remaining effectiveness unknown. These quality and safety outcomes underscore the importance of Choosing Wisely—campaigns launched in the United States,5 Canada,6 Denmark,7 and Australia.8 These campaigns highlight how some practices become entrenched in everyday routines; such practices are commonly referred to as “sacred cows,” “tradition-based,” or “low-value.”5–9 This problem is not unique to nursing. Overuse of health care services is recognized worldwide, from medications, screening and diagnostic tests, and therapeutic procedures...
Skip Nav Destination
Clinical Evidence Review| July 01 2022
On Low-Value Nursing Care: Part 1, Why De-implementation Matters for Quality Care
Margo A. Halm, PhD, RN, NEA-BC
Margo A. Halm is associate chief nurse executive, nursing research and evidence-based practice, VA Portland HealthCare System, Portland, Oregon.
Corresponding author: Margo A. Halm, PhD, RN, NEA-BC, VA Portland HealthCare System, 3710 SW US Veterans Hospital Road, Portland, OR 97239 (email: firstname.lastname@example.org).
Search for other works by this author on:
Am J Crit Care (2022) 31 (4): 338–342.
Margo A. Halm; On Low-Value Nursing Care: Part 1, Why De-implementation Matters for Quality Care. Am J Crit Care 1 July 2022; 31 (4): 338–342. doi: https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2022857
Download citation file:
Don't already have an account? Register