Cargando…

Improving completeness of electronic problem lists through clinical decision support: a randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Accurate clinical problem lists are critical for patient care, clinical decision support, population reporting, quality improvement, and research. However, problem lists are often incomplete or out of date. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a clinical alerting system, which uses inference...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wright, Adam, Pang, Justine, Feblowitz, Joshua C, Maloney, Francine L, Wilcox, Allison R, McLoughlin, Karen Sax, Ramelson, Harley, Schneider, Louise, Bates, David W
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Group 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3384110/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22215056
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000521
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Accurate clinical problem lists are critical for patient care, clinical decision support, population reporting, quality improvement, and research. However, problem lists are often incomplete or out of date. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a clinical alerting system, which uses inference rules to notify providers of undocumented problems, improves problem list documentation. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Inference rules for 17 conditions were constructed and an electronic health record-based intervention was evaluated to improve problem documentation. A cluster randomized trial was conducted of 11 participating clinics affiliated with a large academic medical center, totaling 28 primary care clinical areas, with 14 receiving the intervention and 14 as controls. The intervention was a clinical alert directed to the provider that suggested adding a problem to the electronic problem list based on inference rules. The primary outcome measure was acceptance of the alert. The number of study problems added in each arm as a pre-specified secondary outcome was also assessed. Data were collected during 6-month pre-intervention (11/2009–5/2010) and intervention (5/2010–11/2010) periods. RESULTS: 17 043 alerts were presented, of which 41.1% were accepted. In the intervention arm, providers documented significantly more study problems (adjusted OR=3.4, p<0.001), with an absolute difference of 6277 additional problems. In the intervention group, 70.4% of all study problems were added via the problem list alerts. Significant increases in problem notation were observed for 13 of 17 conditions. CONCLUSION: Problem inference alerts significantly increase notation of important patient problems in primary care, which in turn has the potential to facilitate quality improvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01105923.