Dataset Information

Physicians Voluntarily Using an EHR-Based CDS Tool Improved Patients' Guideline-Related Statin Prescription Rates: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT: Background: In 2013, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) released a revised guideline on statin therapy initiation. The guideline included a 10-year risk calculation based on regression modeling, which made hand calculation infeasible. Compliance to the guideline has been suboptimal, as many patients were recommended but not prescribed statin therapy. Clinical decision support (CDS) tools may improve statin guideline compliance. Few statin guideline CDS tools evaluated clinical outcome.

Objectives: We determined if use of a CDS tool, the statin macro, was associated with increased 2013 ACC/AHA statin guideline compliance at the level of statin prescription versus no statin prescription. We did not determine if each patient's statin prescription met ACC/AHA 2013 therapy intensity recommendations (high vs. moderate vs. low).

Methods: The authors developed a clinician-initiated, EHR-embedded statin macro command ("statin macro") that displayed the 2013 ACC/AHA statin guideline recommendation in the electronic health record documentation. We included patients who had a primary care visit during the study period (January 1-June 30, 2016), were eligible for statin therapy based on the ACC/AHA guideline prior to the study period, and were not prescribed statin therapy prior to the study period. We tested the association of macro usage and statin therapy prescription during the study period using relative risk and mixed effect logistic regression.

Results: Subjects included 11,877 patients seen in primary care, who were retrospectively recommended statin therapy at study initiation based on the ACC/AHA guideline, but who had not received statin therapy. During the study period, 125 clinicians used the statin macro command for 389 of the 11,877 patients (3.2%). Of the 389 patients for whom that statin macro was used, 108 patients (28%) had a statin prescribed during the study period. Of the 11,488 for whom the statin macro was not used, 1,360 (13%) patients received a clinician-prescribed statin (relative risk 2.3, p?p?
Conclusion: Although the statin macro had low uptake, its use was associated with a greater rate of statin prescriptions (dosage not determined) for patients whom 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines required statin therapy.

SUBMITTER: Chang TS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6584145 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Physicians Voluntarily Using an EHR-Based CDS Tool Improved Patients' Guideline-Related Statin Prescription Rates: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Chang Timothy S TS Buchipudi Ashwin A Fonarow Gregg C GC Pfeffer Michael A MA Singer Jennifer S JS Cheng Eric M EM

Applied clinical informatics 20190501 3

<h4>Background</h4>In 2013, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) released a revised guideline on statin therapy initiation. The guideline included a 10-year risk calculation based on regression modeling, which made hand calculation infeasible. Compliance to the guideline has been suboptimal, as many patients were recommended but not prescribed statin therapy. Clinical decision support (CDS) tools may improve statin guideline compliance. Few statin gui ...[more]

PMID: 31216590

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMillions of individuals worldwide use statins, and their significant impact on cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been well-established. However, a lack of knowledge about the up-to-date guideline recommendations regarding statin therapy is a common barrier to implementation in clinical practice. Therefore, the present study aimed to assess the current clinical knowledge about statin therapy and its monitoring parameters. Also, we evaluated the barriers to cholesterol management guideline implementation in Yemen.MethodsThis observational cross-sectional study was conducted over four months, from June/2021 to September/2021, in Sana'a, Yemen. A validated questionnaire was distributed face-to-face to 650 participants (350 physicians and 300 pharmacists). Physicians and pharmacists from governmental and private hospitals and those working in private clinics or community pharmacies were included in the study.ResultsA total of 496 participants filled out the survey, with 22 being excluded due to incomplete data. So, the study has an overall response rate of 72.9% (474). The majority of pharmacists (81.8%) and physicians (78.7%) could not identify the patient group that needed ASCVD risk assessment before statin therapy initiation. Although a significant proportion of respondents knew of the fact that high-intensity statins are recommended for patients with ASCVD (65.4%) and primary hypercholesterolemia (58.4%), the majority of physicians and pharmacists could not identify the high (61.6% and 66.7.3%, respectively) and moderate statin-intensity doses (72.2% and 68.6%, respectively). Only 21.9% of all respondents knew that atorvastatin and rosuvastatin can be administered at any time of the day. Similarly, a low overall rate of respondents (19.6%) knew that atorvastatin does not need dose adjustment in chronic kidney diseases, with a statistically significant difference in knowledge between physicians and pharmacists (12.5% vs. 25.6%, p <0.001, respectively). Notably, only 39.2% of participants were aware that statins are not safe to use during breastfeeding. Around half of respondents (52.3%) correctly identify the duration (4 to 12 weeks) at which LD-C measuring is recommended after therapy initiation or dose change. The lowest knowledge scores for respondents were related to statin-drug interactions. Age, experience, degree, and previous guideline exposure were all significantly associated with the knowledge scores (p <0.05). The four most perceived barriers to implementing cholesterol management guidelines were no audit on adherence to the guidelines in the workplace (73.4%), insufficient resources to adequately implement and follow up on the guideline's recommendations (73.6%), patient's financial status (75.7%), and lack of familiarity about the guideline's latest recommendations (63.3%).ConclusionPhysicians and pharmacists had suboptimal clinical knowledge regarding statin therapy, dose intensities, drug-drug interaction, contraindications, and monitoring parameters. Therefore, physicians' and pharmacists' educational interventions regarding the up-to-date recommendation about statins are recommended.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:We employed an agile, user-centered approach to the design of a clinical decision support tool in our prior integrated clinical prediction rule study, which achieved high adoption rates. To understand if applying this user-centered process to adapt clinical decision support tools is effective in improving the use of clinical prediction rules, we examined utilization rates of a clinical decision support tool adapted from the original integrated clinical prediction rule study tool to determine if applying this user-centered process to design yields enhanced utilization rates similar to the integrated clinical prediction rule study.MATERIALS & METHODS: We conducted pre-deployment usability testing and semi-structured group interviews at 6 months post-deployment with 75 providers at 14 intervention clinics across the two sites to collect user feedback. Qualitative data analysis is bifurcated into immediate and delayed stages; we reported on immediate-stage findings from real-time field notes used to generate a set of rapid, pragmatic recommendations for iterative refinement. Monthly utilization rates were calculated and examined over 12 months. RESULTS:We hypothesized a well-validated, user-centered clinical decision support tool would lead to relatively high adoption rates. Then 6 months post-deployment, integrated clinical prediction rule study tool utilization rates were substantially lower than anticipated based on the original integrated clinical prediction rule study trial (68%) at 17% (Health System A) and 5% (Health System B). User feedback at 6 months resulted in recommendations for tool refinement, which were incorporated when possible into tool design; however, utilization rates at 12 months post-deployment remained low at 14% and 4% respectively. DISCUSSION:Although valuable, findings demonstrate the limitations of a user-centered approach given the complexity of clinical decision support. CONCLUSION:Strategies for addressing persistent external factors impacting clinical decision support adoption should be considered in addition to the user-centered design and implementation of clinical decision support.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the limitations of the existing physician directory in measuring electronic health record adoption rates among a cohort of Connecticut physicians.DesignA population-based mailing assessed the number of physicians practising in Connecticut.MeasurementsInformation about practice site, practises pertaining to storing of patient information, sources of revenue and preferred method for receiving survey. Practice status in Connecticut, measured by yes and no. Demographic information was collected on gender, year of birth, race and ethnicity.ResultsThe response rate for the postcard mailing was 19% (3105/16 462). Of the 16 462 unduplicated consumers, 233 (1%) were retired and 5828 (35%) did not practise in Connecticut. Of the 3105 valid postcard responses we received, 2159 were for physicians practising in Connecticut. Nine (0.4%) of these responses did not specify a preferred method for receiving the full physician survey; 91 physicians refused to participate in the survey; 2159 surveys were sent out using each physician's requested method for receiving the survey, that is, web-based, regular mail or telephone. As of August 2012, 898 physicians had returned surveys, resulting in a response rate of 42%.LimitationsThe postcard response rate based on the unduplicated lists adjusted for exclusions, such as death, retired and do not practise in Connecticut, is 30%, which is low. We may be missing physicians' population which could greatly affect the indicators being used to measure change in electronic health record adoption rates.ConclusionsIt is difficult to obtain an accurate physician count of practising physicians in Connecticut from the existing lists. States that are participating in the projects funded under various Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) initiatives must focus on getting an accurate count of the physicians practising in their state, since their progress is being measured based on this key number.

Dataset Information

Physicians Voluntarily Using an EHR-Based CDS Tool Improved Patients' Guideline-Related Statin Prescription Rates: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Publications

Physicians Voluntarily Using an EHR-Based CDS Tool Improved Patients' Guideline-Related Statin Prescription Rates: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets