The shift in the United States in recent years toward value-based healthcare delivery models has brought renewed pressure on healthcare organizations to improve adherence to clinical and administrative guidelines designed to deliver high quality care at lower costs. However, getting clinicians to adhere to these guidelines remains a persistent problem for many organizations. The use of nudges has emerged as a popular intervention in healthcare settings to promote adherence to both sets of guidelines. This systematic review aims to assess the empirical evidence base on the use of various types of nudges and their effectiveness as a tool to promote this adherence and to identify the boundary conditions under which they are effective. In our assessment of 83 empirical studies, we found compelling evidence that nudges are an effective tool for promoting adherence to guidelines. However, much of this evidence relies heavily on studies focused on three types of nudges (increasing salience, providing feedback, and default). Other types of nudges (anticipated error reduction, structuring of complex problems, and understanding mapping) received far less attention. We also found that this literature is primarily focused on whether nudge interventions work, with little consideration for organizational issues such as cost effectiveness, impact on healthcare workers, and disruptions of established workflows and routines. We offer observations and recommendations on how research at the intersection of organizational studies and health services can improve our understanding of nudge interventions.
Keywords: Adherence to guidelines; Behavioral economics; Choice architecture; Literature review; Nudges.
Published by Elsevier Ltd.