Dataset Information

Barriers and enablers to implementing and using clinical decision support systems for chronic diseases: a qualitative systematic review and meta-aggregation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Clinical decision support (CDS) is increasingly used to facilitate chronic disease care. Despite increased availability of electronic health records and the ongoing development of new CDS technologies, uptake of CDS into routine clinical settings is inconsistent. This qualitative systematic review seeks to synthesise healthcare provider experiences of CDS-exploring the barriers and enablers to implementing, using, evaluating, and sustaining chronic disease CDS systems.

Methods

A search was conducted in Medline, CINAHL, APA PsychInfo, EconLit, and Web of Science from 2011 to 2021. Primary research studies incorporating qualitative findings were included if they targeted healthcare providers and studied a relevant chronic disease CDS intervention. Relevant CDS interventions were electronic health record-based and addressed one or more of the following chronic diseases: cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and hypercholesterolaemia. Qualitative findings were synthesised using a meta-aggregative approach.

Results

Thirty-three primary research articles were included in this qualitative systematic review. Meta-aggregation of qualitative data revealed 177 findings and 29 categories, which were aggregated into 8 synthesised findings. The synthesised findings related to clinical context, user, external context, and technical factors affecting CDS uptake. Key barriers to uptake included CDS systems that were simplistic, had limited clinical applicability in multimorbidity, and integrated poorly into existing workflows. Enablers to successful CDS interventions included perceived usefulness in providing relevant clinical knowledge and structured chronic disease care; user confidence gained through training and post training follow-up; external contexts comprised of strong clinical champions, allocated personnel, and technical support; and CDS technical features that are both highly functional, and attractive.

Conclusion

This systematic review explored healthcare provider experiences, focussing on barriers and enablers to CDS use for chronic diseases. The results provide an evidence-base for designing, implementing, and sustaining future CDS systems. Based on the findings from this review, we highlight actionable steps for practice and future research.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42020203716.

SUBMITTER: Chen W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9330991 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite the increasing availability of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and rising expectation for CDSSs based on artificial intelligence (AI), little is known about the acceptance of AI-based CDSS by physicians and its barriers and facilitators in emergency care settings.ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the acceptance, barriers, and facilitators to implementing AI-based CDSSs in the emergency care setting through the opinions of physicians on our newly developed, real-time AI-based CDSS, which alerts ED physicians by predicting aortic dissection based on numeric and text information from medical charts, by using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT; for quantitative evaluation) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR; for qualitative evaluation) frameworks.MethodsThis mixed methods study was performed from March to April 2021. Transitional year residents (n=6), emergency medicine residents (n=5), and emergency physicians (n=3) from two community, tertiary care hospitals in Japan were included. We first developed a real-time CDSS for predicting aortic dissection based on numeric and text information from medical charts (eg, chief complaints, medical history, vital signs) with natural language processing. This system was deployed on the internet, and the participants used the system with clinical vignettes of model cases. Participants were then involved in a mixed methods evaluation consisting of a UTAUT-based questionnaire with a 5-point Likert scale (quantitative) and a CFIR-based semistructured interview (qualitative). Cronbach α was calculated as a reliability estimate for UTAUT subconstructs. Interviews were sampled, transcribed, and analyzed using the MaxQDA software. The framework analysis approach was used during the study to determine the relevance of the CFIR constructs.ResultsAll 14 participants completed the questionnaires and interviews. Quantitative analysis revealed generally positive responses for user acceptance with all scores above the neutral score of 3.0. In addition, the mixed methods analysis identified two significant barriers (System Performance, Compatibility) and two major facilitators (Evidence Strength, Design Quality) for implementation of AI-based CDSSs in emergency care settings.ConclusionsOur mixed methods evaluation based on theoretically grounded frameworks revealed the acceptance, barriers, and facilitators of implementation of AI-based CDSS. Although the concern of system failure and overtrusting of the system could be barriers to implementation, the locality of the system and designing an intuitive user interface could likely facilitate the use of optimal AI-based CDSS. Alleviating and resolving these factors should be key to achieving good user acceptance of AI-based CDSS.

Project description:BackgroundMachine learning (ML)-based clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are popular in clinical practice settings but are often criticized for being limited in usability, interpretability, and effectiveness. Evaluating the implementation of ML-based CDSS is critical to ensure CDSS is acceptable and useful to clinicians and helps them deliver high-quality health care. Malnutrition is a common and underdiagnosed condition among hospital patients, which can have serious adverse impacts. Early identification and treatment of malnutrition are important.ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the implementation of an ML tool, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST)-Plus, that predicts hospital patients at high risk for malnutrition and identify best implementation practices applicable to this and other ML-based CDSS.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative postimplementation evaluation using in-depth interviews with registered dietitians (RDs) who use MUST-Plus output in their everyday work. After coding the data, we mapped emergent themes onto select domains of the nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) framework.ResultsWe interviewed 17 of the 24 RDs approached (71%), representing 37% of those who use MUST-Plus output. Several themes emerged: (1) enhancements to the tool were made to improve accuracy and usability; (2) MUST-Plus helped identify patients that would not otherwise be seen; perceived usefulness was highest in the original site; (3) perceived accuracy varied by respondent and site; (4) RDs valued autonomy in prioritizing patients; (5) depth of tool understanding varied by hospital and level; (6) MUST-Plus was integrated into workflows and electronic health records; and (7) RDs expressed a desire to eventually have 1 automated screener.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that continuous involvement of stakeholders at new sites given staff turnover is vital to ensure buy-in. Qualitative research can help identify the potential bias of ML tools and should be widely used to ensure health equity. Ongoing collaboration among CDSS developers, data scientists, and clinical providers may help refine CDSS for optimal use and improve the acceptability of CDSS in the clinical context.

Project description:BackgroundRare Diseases (RDs), which are defined as diseases affecting no more than 5 out of 10,000 people, are often severe, chronic and life-threatening. A main problem is the delay in diagnosing RDs. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) for RDs are software systems to support clinicians in the diagnosis of patients with RDs. Due to their clinical importance, we conducted a scoping review to determine which CDSSs are available to support the diagnosis of RDs patients, whether the CDSSs are available to be used by clinicians and which functionalities and data are used to provide decision support.MethodsWe searched PubMed for CDSSs in RDs published between December 16, 2008 and December 16, 2018. Only English articles, original peer reviewed journals and conference papers describing a clinical prototype or a routine use of CDSSs were included. For data charting, we used the data items "Objective and background of the publication/project", "System or project name", "Functionality", "Type of clinical data", "Rare Diseases covered", "Development status", "System availability", "Data entry and integration", "Last software update" and "Clinical usage".ResultsThe search identified 636 articles. After title and abstracting screening, as well as assessing the eligibility criteria for full-text screening, 22 articles describing 19 different CDSSs were identified. Three types of CDSSs were classified: "Analysis or comparison of genetic and phenotypic data," "machine learning" and "information retrieval". Twelve of nineteen CDSSs use phenotypic and genetic data, followed by clinical data, literature databases and patient questionnaires. Fourteen of nineteen CDSSs are fully developed systems and therefore publicly available. Data can be entered or uploaded manually in six CDSSs, whereas for four CDSSs no information for data integration was available. Only seven CDSSs allow further ways of data integration. thirteen CDSS do not provide information about clinical usage.ConclusionsDifferent CDSS for various purposes are available, yet clinicians have to determine which is best for their patient. To allow a more precise usage, future research has to focus on CDSSs RDs data integration, clinical usage and updating clinical knowledge. It remains interesting which of the CDSSs will be used and maintained in the future.

Project description:Most mobile health (mHealth) decision support systems currently available for chronic obstructive respiratory diseases (CORDs) are not supported by clinical evidence or lack clinical validation. The development of the knowledge base that will feed the clinical decision support system is a crucial step that involves the collection and systematization of clinical knowledge from relevant scientific sources and its representation in a human-understandable and computer-interpretable way. This work describes the development and initial validation of a clinical knowledge base that can be integrated into mHealth decision support systems developed for patients with CORDs. A multidisciplinary team of health care professionals with clinical experience in respiratory diseases, together with data science and IT professionals, defined a new framework that can be used in other evidence-based systems. The knowledge base development began with a thorough review of the relevant scientific sources (eg, disease guidelines) to identify the recommendations to be implemented in the decision support system based on a consensus process. Recommendations were selected according to predefined inclusion criteria: (1) applicable to individuals with CORDs or to prevent CORDs, (2) directed toward patient self-management, (3) targeting adults, and (4) within the scope of the knowledge domains and subdomains defined. Then, the selected recommendations were prioritized according to (1) a harmonized level of evidence (reconciled from different sources); (2) the scope of the source document (international was preferred); (3) the entity that issued the source document; (4) the operability of the recommendation; and (5) health care professionals' perceptions of the relevance, potential impact, and reach of the recommendation. A total of 358 recommendations were selected. Next, the variables required to trigger those recommendations were defined (n=116) and operationalized into logical rules using Boolean logical operators (n=405). Finally, the knowledge base was implemented in an intelligent individualized coaching component and pretested with an asthma use case. Initial validation of the knowledge base was conducted internally using data from a population-based observational study of individuals with or without asthma or rhinitis. External validation of the appropriateness of the recommendations with the highest priority level was conducted independently by 4 physicians. In addition, a strategy for knowledge base updates, including an easy-to-use rules editor, was defined. Using this process, based on consensus and iterative improvement, we developed and conducted preliminary validation of a clinical knowledge base for CORDs that translates disease guidelines into personalized patient recommendations. The knowledge base can be used as part of mHealth decision support systems. This process could be replicated in other clinical areas.

Project description:Complying with good manufacturing practices (GMP) and ensuring a quality system is integral to production and supply of quality medicines and achieving universal health coverage. This study focus on the local production of medicines in Pakistan, a lower middle-income country that has observed considerable growth in the number of pharmaceutical companies over the past two decades. Against this background, we investigated: (1) How is quality assurance (QA) and GMP compliance understood and acted upon by local pharmaceutical manufacturers?; (2) What are the institutional barriers and enablers for QA and GMP compliance in the local pharmaceutical sector from the perspective of key stakeholders?; and (3) What are the institutional barriers and enablers for strengthening local regulatory capacity to improve QA in the industry in the long term? We used a qualitative study design involving 22 interviews of the drug regulatory bodies (n = 9), academia (n = 3) and local manufacturers (n = 10), identifying key themes in data by thematic analysis. Document analysis was used to collect additional information and supplement the interview data. We identified that manufacturing facilities operated under different GMP standards and interpretations, pointing towards an absence of harmonization in quality standards across the industry. Views diverged about the status of GMP compliance, with interviewees from academia presenting a more critical view compared with regulators who promoted a more positive story. Among the barriers explaining why companies struggled with quality standards, the lack of a mindset promoting quality and safety among profit-oriented manufacturers was prominent. At the federal level, DRAP's establishment represented an institutional improvement aiming to promote QA through inspections and guidance. While some positive measures to promote quality have been observed, the need for DRAP to strengthen its technical and regulatory capacity, enhance its engagement in international collaboration and learning, and improve transparency and accountability were highlighted. Overall, since the challenges in Pakistan are shared with other low- and middle-income countries with local production, there is a need to commit to international collaborative mechanisms, such as those lead by WHO, on this issue.

Project description:BackgroundRare Diseases (RDs) are difficult to diagnose. Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) could support the diagnosis for RDs. The Medical Informatics in Research and Medicine (MIRACUM) consortium developed a CDSS for RDs based on distributed clinical data from eight German university hospitals. To support the diagnosis for difficult patient cases, the CDSS uses data from the different hospitals to perform a patient similarity analysis to obtain an indication of a diagnosis. To optimize our CDSS, we conducted a qualitative study to investigate usability and functionality of our designed CDSS.MethodsWe performed a Thinking Aloud Test (TA-Test) with RDs experts working in Rare Diseases Centers (RDCs) at MIRACUM locations which are specialized in diagnosis and treatment of RDs. An instruction sheet with tasks was prepared that the participants should perform with the CDSS during the study. The TA-Test was recorded on audio and video, whereas the resulting transcripts were analysed with a qualitative content analysis, as a ruled-guided fixed procedure to analyse text-based data. Furthermore, a questionnaire was handed out at the end of the study including the System Usability Scale (SUS).ResultsA total of eight experts from eight MIRACUM locations with an established RDC were included in the study. Results indicate that more detailed information about patients, such as descriptive attributes or findings, can help the system perform better. The system was rated positively in terms of functionality, such as functions that enable the user to obtain an overview of similar patients or medical history of a patient. However, there is a lack of transparency in the results of the CDSS patient similarity analysis. The study participants often stated that the system should present the user with an overview of exact symptoms, diagnosis, and other characteristics that define two patients as similar. In the usability section, the CDSS received a score of 73.21 points, which is ranked as good usability.ConclusionsThis qualitative study investigated the usability and functionality of a CDSS of RDs. Despite positive feedback about functionality of system, the CDSS still requires some revisions and improvement in transparency of the patient similarity analysis.