Dataset Information

Improved preventive care clinical decision-making efficiency: leveraging a point-of-care clinical decision support system

ABSTRACT:

Background

Electronic medical records are widely used in family practices across Canada and can improve health outcomes. However, recent reports indicate that physicians using electronic medical records work longer and have less direct patient contact which may contribute to burnout. Therefore, new and innovative digital tools are essential to reduce physician workloads and improve patient-physician interaction to address physician burnout. The objective of this study was to assess the efficiency and accuracy of clinical decision-making when using a new preventive care point-of-care clinical decision support system (CDSS). An estimate of the potential annual time savings was also determined. This study also assessed physician reported perceived usefulness and ease of use of the CDSS.

Methods

Quantitative and qualitative data were collected during this study. Each participant evaluated two simulated patient charts and identified which preventive care metrics were due. The participants recorded their decisions and the time required to assess each chart. Participants then completed a Technology Acceptance Model survey regarding the perceived usefulness and ease of use of the CDSS, which included qualitative feedback. The amount of time saved was determined and participants’ clinical decision-making accuracy was scored against current Canadian preventive care guidelines. The number of preventive care specific visits completed per year was determined using clinic billing data.

Results

The preventive care CDSS saved an average of 195.7 s of chart review time (249.5 s vs 445.2 s; P < 0.001). A total of 1520 preventive visits were performed at Primrose and Bruyère Family Medicine Centres. Extrapolated across the organization, implementation of the new tool could save 82.6 h per year. Decision-making accuracy was not affected by the new tool (78.4% vs 80.9%, P > 0.05). Participants rated the perceived ease of use and usefulness to be very high.

Conclusions

New digital tools may reduce providers’ workload without impacting clinical decision-making accuracy. Participants indicated that the preventive care CDSS was useful and easy to use. Further software development and clinical studies are required to further improve and characterize the effect this new CDSS has when implemented in clinical practice.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-021-01675-8.

SUBMITTER: Laing S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8588582 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInnovative interventions are needed to address gaps in preventive cancer care, especially in rural areas. This study evaluated the impact of clinical decision support (CDS) with and without shared decision making (SDM) on cancer-screening completion.MethodsIn this 3-arm, parallel-group, cluster-randomized trial conducted at a predominantly rural medical group, 34 primary care clinics were randomized to clinical decision support (CDS), CDS plus shared decision making (CDS+SDM), or usual care (UC). The CDS applied web-based clinical algorithms identifying patients overdue for United States Preventive Services Task Force-recommended preventive cancer care and presented evidence-based recommendations to patients and providers on printouts and on the electronic health record interface. Patients in the CDS+SDM clinic also received shared decision-making tools (SDMTs). The primary outcome was a composite indicator of the proportion of patients overdue for breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer screening at index who were up to date on these 1 y later.ResultsFrom August 1, 2018, to March 15, 2019, 69,405 patients aged 21 to 74 y had visits at study clinics and 25,198 were overdue for 1 or more cancer screening tests at an index visit. At 12-mo follow-up, 9,543 of these (37.9%) were up to date on the composite endpoint. The adjusted, model-derived percentage of patients up to date was 36.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 34.0-39.1) in the UC group, 38.1% (95% CI: 35.5-40.9) in the CDS group, and 34.4% (95% CI: 31.8-37.2) in the CDS+SDM group. For all comparisons, the screening rates were higher than UC in the CDS group and lower than UC in the CDS+SDM group, although these differences did not reach statistical significance.ConclusionThe CDS did not significantly increase cancer-screening rates. Exploratory analyses suggest a deeper understanding of how SDM and CDS interact to affect cancer prevention decisions is needed. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02986230, December 6, 2016.

Project description:BackgroundClinical pathways are one of the main tools to manage the health care's quality and concerned with the standardization of care processes. They have been used to help frontline healthcare workers by presenting summarized evidence and generating clinical workflows involving a series of tasks performed by various people within and between work environments to deliver care. Integrating clinical pathways into Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSSs) is a common practice today. However, in a low-resource setting (LRS), this kind of decision support systems is often not readily accessible or even not available. To fill this gap, we developed a computer aided CDSS that swiftly identifies which cases require a referral and which ones may be managed locally. The computer aided CDSS is designed primarily for use in primary care settings for maternal and childcare services, namely for pregnant patients, antenatal and postnatal care. The purpose of this paper is to assess the user acceptance of the computer aided CDSS at the point of care in LRSs.MethodsFor evaluation, we used a total of 22 parameters structured in to six major categories, namely "ease of use, system quality, information quality, decision changes, process changes, and user acceptance." Based on these parameters, the caregivers from Jimma Health Center's Maternal and Child Health Service Unit evaluated the acceptability of a computer aided CDSS. The respondents were asked to express their level of agreement using 22 parameters in a think-aloud approach. The evaluation was conducted in the caregiver's spare-time after the clinical decision. It was based on eighteen cases over the course of two days. The respondents were then asked to score their level of agreement with some statements on a five-point scale: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and strongly agree.ResultsThe CDSS received a favorable agreement score in all six categories by obtaining primarily strongly agree and agree responses. In contrast, a follow-up interview revealed a variety of reasons for disagreement based on the neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree responses.ConclusionsThough the study had a positive outcome, it was limited to the Jimma Health Center Maternal and Childcare Unit, and hence a wider scale evaluation and longitudinal measurements, including computer aided CDSS usage frequency, speed of operation and impact on intervention time are needed.

Project description:BackgroundDOAC detection is challenging in emergency situations. Here, we demonstrated recently, that modified thromboelastometric tests can reliably detect and differentiate dabigatran and rivaroxaban. However, whether all DOACs can be detected and differentiated to other coagulopathies is unclear. Therefore, we now tested the hypothesis that a decision tree-based thromboelastometry algorithm enables detection and differentiation of all direct Xa-inhibitors (DXaIs), the direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI) dabigatran, as well as vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and dilutional coagulopathy (DIL) with high accuracy.MethodsFollowing ethics committee approval (No 17-525-4), and registration by the German clinical trials database we conducted a prospective observational trial including 50 anticoagulated patients (n = 10 of either DOAC/VKA) and 20 healthy volunteers. Blood was drawn independent of last intake of coagulation inhibitor. Healthy volunteers served as controls and their blood was diluted to simulate a 50% dilution in vitro. Standard (extrinsic coagulation assay, fibrinogen assay, etc.) and modified thromboelastometric tests (ecarin assay and extrinsic coagulation assay with low tissue factor) were performed. Statistical analyzes included a decision tree analyzes, with depiction of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, as well as receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC) curve analysis including optimal cut-off values (Youden-Index).ResultsFirst, standard thromboelastometric tests allow a good differentiation between DOACs and VKA, DIL and controls, however they fail to differentiate DXaIs, DTIs and VKAs reliably resulting in an overall accuracy of 78%. Second, adding modified thromboelastometric tests, 9/10 DTI and 28/30 DXaI patients were detected, resulting in an overall accuracy of 94%. Complex decision trees even increased overall accuracy to 98%. ROC curve analyses confirm the decision-tree-based results showing high sensitivity and specificity for detection and differentiation of DTI, DXaIs, VKA, DIL, and controls.ConclusionsDecision tree-based machine-learning algorithms using standard and modified thromboelastometric tests allow reliable detection of DTI and DXaIs, and differentiation to VKA, DIL and controls.Trial registrationClinical trial number: German clinical trials database ID: DRKS00015704 .

Project description:The emergency department (ED) is a fast-paced environment responsible for large volumes of patients with varied disease acuity. Operational pressures on EDs are increasing, which creates the imperative to efficiently identify patients at imminent risk of acute deterioration. The aim of this study is to systematically compare the performance of machine learning algorithms based on logistic regression, gradient boosted decision trees, and support vector machines for predicting imminent clinical deterioration for patients based on cross-sectional patient data extracted from electronic patient records (EPR) at the point of entry to the hospital. We apply state-of-the-art machine learning methods to predict early patient deterioration, based on their first recorded vital signs, observations, laboratory results, and other predictors documented in the EPR. Clinical deterioration in this study is measured by in-hospital mortality and/or admission to critical care. We build on prior work by incorporating interpretable machine learning and fairness-aware modelling, and use a dataset comprising 118, 886 unplanned admissions to Salford Royal Hospital, UK, to systematically compare model variations for predicting mortality and critical care utilisation within 24 hours of admission. We compare model performance to the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) and yield up to a 0.366 increase in average precision, up to a [Formula: see text] reduction in daily alert rate, and a median 0.599 reduction in differential bias amplification across the protected demographics of age and sex. We use Shapely Additive exPlanations to justify the models' outputs, verify that the captured data associations align with domain knowledge, and pair predictions with the causal context of each patient's most influential characteristics. Introducing our modelling to clinical practice has the potential to reduce alert fatigue and identify high-risk patients with a lower NEWS2 that might be missed currently, but further work is needed to trial the models in clinical practice. We encourage future research to follow a systematised approach to data-driven risk modelling to obtain clinically applicable support tools.

Project description:BackgroundElectronic health record (EHR) systems are becoming increasingly complicated, leading to concerns about rising physician burnout, particularly for primary care physicians (PCPs). Managing the most common cardiometabolic chronic conditions by PCPs during a limited clinical time with a patient is challenging.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate a Cardiometabolic Sutter Health Advanced Reengineered Encounter (CM-SHARE), a web-based application to visualize key EHR data, on the EHR use efficiency.MethodsWe developed algorithms to identify key clinic workflow measures (eg, total encounter time, total physician time in the examination room, and physician EHR time in the examination room) using audit data, and we validated and calibrated the measures with time-motion data. We used a pre-post parallel design to identify propensity score-matched CM-SHARE users (cases), nonusers (controls), and nested-matched patients. Cardiometabolic encounters from matched case and control patients were used for the workflow evaluation. Outcome measures were compared between the cases and controls. We applied this approach separately to both the CM-SHARE pilot and spread phases.ResultsTime-motion observation was conducted on 101 primary care encounters for 9 PCPs in 3 clinics. There was little difference (<0.8 minutes) between the audit data-derived workflow measures and the time-motion observation. Two key unobservable times from audit data, physician entry into and exiting the examination room, were imputed based on time-motion studies. CM-SHARE was launched with 6 pilot PCPs in April 2016. During the prestudy period (April 1, 2015, to April 1, 2016), 870 control patients with 2845 encounters were matched with 870 case patients and encounters, and 727 case patients with 852 encounters were matched with 727 control patients and 3754 encounters in the poststudy period (June 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017). Total encounter time was slightly shorter (mean -2.7, SD 1.4 minutes, 95% CI -4.7 to -0.9; mean -1.6, SD 1.1 minutes, 95% CI -3.2 to -0.1) for cases than controls for both periods. CM-SHARE saves physicians approximately 2 minutes EHR time in the examination room (mean -2.0, SD 1.3, 95% CI -3.4 to -0.9) compared with prestudy period and poststudy period controls (mean -1.9, SD 0.9, 95% CI -3.8 to -0.5). In the spread phase, 48 CM-SHARE spread PCPs were matched with 84 control PCPs and 1272 cases with 3412 control patients, having 1119 and 4240 encounters, respectively. A significant reduction in total encounter time for the CM-SHARE group was observed for short appointments (≤20 minutes; 5.3-minute reduction on average) only. Total physician EHR time was significantly reduced for both longer and shorter appointments (17%-33% reductions).ConclusionsCombining EHR audit log files and clinical information, our approach offers an innovative and scalable method and new measures that can be used to evaluate clinical EHR efficiency of digital tools used in clinical settings.