Krupka and Weber (2013) introduce an incentive-compatible coordination game as an alternative method for elicitation of normative judgments. I show, however, that people provide virtually the same responses in incentivized and non-incentivized versions of the Krupka-Weber game. Besides ratings of social appropriateness, I also elicit ratings of fairness of all possible offers in an ultimatum game. Ratings of social appropriateness and fairness are similar for low offers (below or equal to the equal split), but not for high offers which are judged to be more appropriate than fair.

Objectives: There is widespread commitment—at least in principle—to “evidence-informed” clinical practice and policy development in health care. The intention is that only “appropriate” care ought to be delivered at public expense. Although the rationale for an appropriateness agenda is widely endorsed, and methods have been proposed for addressing it, few published studies exist of contemporary policy initiatives which have actually led to successful disinvestment. Our objective was to explore whether the direct involvement of policy stakeholders could advance appropriateness and disinvestment.

Methods: Several collaborative engagements with policy stakeholders were undertaken to adapt and combine conceptual and empirical material related to appropriateness and disinvestment from the literature to create tools and processes for use in Canada and the province of Ontario in particular.

Results: By combining inputs from the literature with colloquial evidence from policy stakeholders, a definition of appropriateness was developed and, importantly, endorsed by all the provincial and territorial ministers of health in Canada. Second, a reassessment framework was successfully implemented for identifying priorities for selective disinvestment.

Conclusions: When scientific evidence was combined with colloquial evidence from policy stakeholders, progress was made on the design and successful implementation of policies for appropriateness and disinvestment.

Medication use is recognized as the least expensive, most cost-effective health care intervention. In older adults this is especially important, as they are the largest consumer of prescription medications. We describe the use of a linked data set including pharmaceutical, medical, and hospital claims to examine pharmaceutical use in the population of older adults and then give several examples of its application. Indicators to describe the population's overall use of medication and the appropriate use of specific medication have been developed. Indicators of appropriate use are characterized using the dispensation of benzodiazepines to older adults. We have found that a significant proportion of new users of benzodiazepines are still prescribed a long-acting version (over 10%), signifying potential inappropriate use. The data are also able to describe some significant outcomes from the use of pharmaceuticals such as death, fracture, and population-based clinical measures where available.

We assessed the predictive validity of an expert panel's ratings of the appropriateness of carotid endarterectomy by comparing ratings to the results of subsequent randomized clinical trials. We found the trials confirmed the ratings for 44 indications (covering almost 30% of operations performed in 1981) and refuted the ratings for none.

Objectives: This report is a scoping review of the literature with the objective of identifying definitions, conceptual models and frameworks, as well as the methods and range of perspectives, for determining appropriateness in the context of healthcare delivery.

Methods: To lay groundwork for future, intervention-specific research on appropriateness, this work was carried out as a scoping review of published literature since 1966. Two reviewers, with two screens using inclusion/exclusion criteria based on the objective, focused the research and articles chosen for review.

Results: The first screen examined 2,829 abstracts/titles, with the second screen examining 124 full articles, leaving 37 articles deemed highly relevant for data extraction and interpretation. Appropriateness is defined largely in terms of net clinical benefit to the average patient and varies by service and setting. The most widely used method to assess appropriateness of healthcare services is the RAND/UCLA Model. There are many related concepts such as medical necessity and small-areas variation.

Conclusions: A broader approach to determining appropriateness for healthcare interventions is possible and would involve clinical, patient and societal perspectives.

Objectives: The objective of this study is to describe the frequency of inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy in secondary intra-abdominal infection and to identify the possible relationship between inappropriateness and some clinical outcomes.

Methods: A retrospective descriptive multicenter study was conducted using hospital secondary databases developed at two university hospitals located in northeast Spain. Participants were patients 18 years of age or older who were diagnosed with community-acquired intra-abdominal infections between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2000, identified through computerized patient records using ICD-9 codes. Appropriateness of empirical treatment was defined according to the recommendations of the literature. The clinical outcome of each patient was classified as one of the following: (i) resolved with initial therapy, (ii) required second-line antibiotics, (iii) required re-operation, or (iv) in-hospital death. The Fisher's exact test or the Chi-squared test for categorical variables and the t-test or Mann–Whitney test for continuous variables were used for comparing groups. Conditional logistic and linear regression analyses were also applied.

Results: Of 376 cases, 51 cases (13.6 percent, 95 percent confidence interval, 10–17 percent) received inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy according to the scientific literature. Inappropriate initial empirical treatment was significantly associated with the need for a second line of antibiotics (p<.001), although not with re-operation, mortality, or length of hospitalization.

Conclusions: Approximately 14 percent of the patients received inappropriate empirical antibiotic treatment. Worse clinical outcomes consistently were observed in the group of patients receiving inappropriate empirical treatment. The appropriateness of antibiotic treatment for a given infection, in light of the availability of clearly defined clinical guidelines is an easily evaluated aspect of the quality of care.

Objectives: To develop and test an appropriateness of indications tool for total knee replacement (TKR) in patients with osteoarthritis.

Methods: Criteria were developed using a modified Delphi panel judgment. Another panel rated the same indications, and the results were compared with the main panel. Test-retest of the main panel was performed. Regression models were used to assess the contribution of each algorithm variable. A classification tree was developed.

Results: The procedure was considered appropriate in 167 (26.8%) scenarios, and there was agreement on 112 (67.1%) of them. When the rates of the main panel were compared with those of a second panel, the result was a kappa statistic of 0.75. The test-retest kappa for the main panel was 0.78. Neither in the first case nor in the second was there an instance in which a scenario classified as appropriate shifted to inappropriate or vice versa. The regression models showed that symptomatology and radiology were the variables that explained most of the variability of appropriateness as determined by panelists. In the classification tree performed, the probability of misclassification was 3.8% with 150 scenarios, of the 156 analyzed and classified correctly.

Conclusions: The previous parameters tested showed acceptable results for an evaluation tool. These results support the use of this algorithm as an aid in formulating clinical practice guidelines and to promote the appropriateness of TKR.

Objective: To evaluate the appropriateness of the use of hip joint replacements (HJRs) using explicit criteria developed by an expert panel.

Methods: Observational study. Nine hundred ninety-seven patients from five hospitals with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis, avascular necrosis, hip fracture, or revision who were undergoing HJR were consecutively included in the study during a 1-year period. The appropriateness of the indication was judged by explicit criteria. Complications were recorded at the time of the intervention and 3 months postoperatively.

Results: Of the 1,030 interventions, 604 were for osteoarthritis, 31 avascular necrosis, 191 fractures, and 204 revisions. No differences were found among the hospitals for the main clinical and patient variables. Indications for surgery were considered appropriate in 59% of cases, uncertain in 32%, and inappropriate in 8%, mainly in the osteoarthritis group. Differences were found in the rates of appropriateness among some centers. The complication rate did not differ among the groups based on the level of appropriateness of the procedure.

Conclusions: The appropriate use of HJR, as measured by the criteria established by the panel, identified a moderate percentage of inappropriate indications. Those equivocal and inappropriate cases demand further studies to identify patients with an adequate risk-to-benefit ratio from this procedure.

Objectives: To assess necessary treatment and degree of urgency for patients admitted to emergency rooms, and potential health consequences of transfer to nearest alternative hospital.

Methods: During 1 month, we included all 1,300 emergently admitted patients in all seven general hospitals in a Norwegian county with a population of 236,921 inhabitants. The number of patients in need of surgical and/or intensive medical treatment, the urgency of the necessary treatment, and the risk to each patient of adverse permanent health consequences of further transport to nearest alternative hospital were assessed by a multidisciplinary expert panel.

Results: Ninety-four patients (7.2% of 1300 patients) were considered in need of either surgical (n = 22) or intensive medical treatment (n = 70) or both (n = 2) within 8 hours of arrival in hospital. Medical treatment had the greatest urgency, while surgery most often could be postponed. In cases where the patients were initially to be given only stabilizing treatment and then transported (assisted by qualified personnel) to another hospital, the panel estimated the risk of losing health benefit to be high for 14 patients. In six of these cases the risk was linked to delay of thrombolytic treatment.

Conclusions: Fewer than 10% of the patients who are admitted as emergency cases to general hospitals in Norway need surgical or intensive medical treatment within 8 hours of their arrival. The medical consequences of transport of patients to the nearest alternative hospital are generally small and can often be further reduced by simple means.