Cargando…

Use of an Automated Decision Support Tool Optimizes Clinicians’ Ability to Interpret and Appropriately Respond to Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Data

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the impact of an automated decision support tool (DST) on clinicians’ ability to identify glycemic abnormalities in structured self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) data and then make appropriate therapeutic changes based on the glycemic patterns observed. RESEARCH DESIGN A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rodbard, Helena W., Schnell, Oliver, Unger, Jeffrey, Rees, Christen, Amstutz, Linda, Parkin, Christopher G., Jelsovsky, Zhihong, Wegmann, Nathan, Axel-Schweitzer, Matthias, Wagner, Robin S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Diabetes Association 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3308297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22344611
http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1351
_version_ 1782227419620442112
author Rodbard, Helena W.
Schnell, Oliver
Unger, Jeffrey
Rees, Christen
Amstutz, Linda
Parkin, Christopher G.
Jelsovsky, Zhihong
Wegmann, Nathan
Axel-Schweitzer, Matthias
Wagner, Robin S.
author_facet Rodbard, Helena W.
Schnell, Oliver
Unger, Jeffrey
Rees, Christen
Amstutz, Linda
Parkin, Christopher G.
Jelsovsky, Zhihong
Wegmann, Nathan
Axel-Schweitzer, Matthias
Wagner, Robin S.
author_sort Rodbard, Helena W.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the impact of an automated decision support tool (DST) on clinicians’ ability to identify glycemic abnormalities in structured self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) data and then make appropriate therapeutic changes based on the glycemic patterns observed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study, 288 clinicians (39.6% family practice physicians, 37.9% general internal medicine physicians, and 22.6% nurse practitioners) were randomized to structured SMBG alone (STG; n = 72); structured SMBG with DST (DST; n = 72); structured SMBG with an educational DVD (DVD; n = 72); and structured SMBG with DST and the educational DVD (DST+DVD; n = 72). Clinicians analyzed 30 patient cases (type 2 diabetes), identified the primary abnormality, and selected the most appropriate therapy. RESULTS: A total of 222 clinicians completed all 30 patient cases with no major protocol deviations. Significantly more DST, DVD, and DST+DVD clinicians correctly identified the glycemic abnormality and selected the most appropriate therapeutic option compared with STG clinicians: 49, 51, and 55%, respectively, vs. 33% (all P < 0.0001) with no significant differences among DST, DVD, and DST+DVD clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Use of structured SMBG, combined with the DST, the educational DVD, or both, enhances clinicians’ ability to correctly identify significant glycemic patterns and make appropriate therapeutic decisions to address those patterns. Structured testing interventions using either the educational DVD or the DST are equally effective in improving data interpretation and utilization. The DST provides a viable alternative when comprehensive education is not feasible, and it may be integrated into medical practices with minimal training.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3308297
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher American Diabetes Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33082972013-04-01 Use of an Automated Decision Support Tool Optimizes Clinicians’ Ability to Interpret and Appropriately Respond to Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Data Rodbard, Helena W. Schnell, Oliver Unger, Jeffrey Rees, Christen Amstutz, Linda Parkin, Christopher G. Jelsovsky, Zhihong Wegmann, Nathan Axel-Schweitzer, Matthias Wagner, Robin S. Diabetes Care Original Research OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the impact of an automated decision support tool (DST) on clinicians’ ability to identify glycemic abnormalities in structured self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) data and then make appropriate therapeutic changes based on the glycemic patterns observed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study, 288 clinicians (39.6% family practice physicians, 37.9% general internal medicine physicians, and 22.6% nurse practitioners) were randomized to structured SMBG alone (STG; n = 72); structured SMBG with DST (DST; n = 72); structured SMBG with an educational DVD (DVD; n = 72); and structured SMBG with DST and the educational DVD (DST+DVD; n = 72). Clinicians analyzed 30 patient cases (type 2 diabetes), identified the primary abnormality, and selected the most appropriate therapy. RESULTS: A total of 222 clinicians completed all 30 patient cases with no major protocol deviations. Significantly more DST, DVD, and DST+DVD clinicians correctly identified the glycemic abnormality and selected the most appropriate therapeutic option compared with STG clinicians: 49, 51, and 55%, respectively, vs. 33% (all P < 0.0001) with no significant differences among DST, DVD, and DST+DVD clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Use of structured SMBG, combined with the DST, the educational DVD, or both, enhances clinicians’ ability to correctly identify significant glycemic patterns and make appropriate therapeutic decisions to address those patterns. Structured testing interventions using either the educational DVD or the DST are equally effective in improving data interpretation and utilization. The DST provides a viable alternative when comprehensive education is not feasible, and it may be integrated into medical practices with minimal training. American Diabetes Association 2012-04 2012-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC3308297/ /pubmed/22344611 http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1351 Text en © 2012 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.
spellingShingle Original Research
Rodbard, Helena W.
Schnell, Oliver
Unger, Jeffrey
Rees, Christen
Amstutz, Linda
Parkin, Christopher G.
Jelsovsky, Zhihong
Wegmann, Nathan
Axel-Schweitzer, Matthias
Wagner, Robin S.
Use of an Automated Decision Support Tool Optimizes Clinicians’ Ability to Interpret and Appropriately Respond to Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Data
title Use of an Automated Decision Support Tool Optimizes Clinicians’ Ability to Interpret and Appropriately Respond to Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Data
title_full Use of an Automated Decision Support Tool Optimizes Clinicians’ Ability to Interpret and Appropriately Respond to Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Data
title_fullStr Use of an Automated Decision Support Tool Optimizes Clinicians’ Ability to Interpret and Appropriately Respond to Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Data
title_full_unstemmed Use of an Automated Decision Support Tool Optimizes Clinicians’ Ability to Interpret and Appropriately Respond to Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Data
title_short Use of an Automated Decision Support Tool Optimizes Clinicians’ Ability to Interpret and Appropriately Respond to Structured Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Data
title_sort use of an automated decision support tool optimizes clinicians’ ability to interpret and appropriately respond to structured self-monitoring of blood glucose data
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3308297/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22344611
http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1351
work_keys_str_mv AT rodbardhelenaw useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT schnelloliver useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT ungerjeffrey useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT reeschristen useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT amstutzlinda useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT parkinchristopherg useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT jelsovskyzhihong useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT wegmannnathan useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT axelschweitzermatthias useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata
AT wagnerrobins useofanautomateddecisionsupporttooloptimizescliniciansabilitytointerpretandappropriatelyrespondtostructuredselfmonitoringofbloodglucosedata