Cargando…

Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation

BACKGROUND: Trials evaluating the effects of interventions usually provide little insight into the factors responsible for (lack of) changes in desired outcomes. A process evaluation alongside a trial can shed light on the mechanisms responsible for the outcomes of a trial. The aim of this study was...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lugtenberg, Marjolein, Pasveer, Dennis, van der Weijden, Trudy, Westert, Gert P., Kool, Rudolf B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4608282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26474603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0364-0
_version_ 1782395643560460288
author Lugtenberg, Marjolein
Pasveer, Dennis
van der Weijden, Trudy
Westert, Gert P.
Kool, Rudolf B.
author_facet Lugtenberg, Marjolein
Pasveer, Dennis
van der Weijden, Trudy
Westert, Gert P.
Kool, Rudolf B.
author_sort Lugtenberg, Marjolein
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Trials evaluating the effects of interventions usually provide little insight into the factors responsible for (lack of) changes in desired outcomes. A process evaluation alongside a trial can shed light on the mechanisms responsible for the outcomes of a trial. The aim of this study was to investigate exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support system (CDSS) intervention, in order to gain insight into the intervention’s impact and to provide suggestions for improvement. METHODS: A process evaluation was conducted as part of a large-scale cluster-randomized controlled trial investigating the effects of the CDSS NHGDoc on quality of care. Data on exposure to and experiences with the intervention were collected during the trial period among participants in both the intervention and control group - whenever applicable - by means of the NHGDoc server and an electronic questionnaire. Multiple data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Ninety-nine percent (n = 229) of the included practices generated data for the NHGDoc server and 50 % (n = 116) responded to the questionnaire: both general practitioners (GPs; n = 112; 49 %) and practice nurses (PNs; n = 52; 37 %) participated. The actual exposure to the NHGDoc system and specific heart failure module was limited with 52 % of the GPs and 42 % of the PNs reporting to either never or rarely use the system. Overall, users had a positive attitude towards CDSSs. The most perceived barriers to using NHGDoc were a lack of learning capacity of the system, the additional time and work it requires to use the CDSS, irrelevant alerts, too high intensity of alerts and insufficient knowledge regarding the system. CONCLUSIONS: Several types of barriers may have negatively affected the impact of the intervention. Although users are generally positive about CDSSs, a large share of them is insufficiently aware of the functions of NHGDoc and, finds the decision support not always useful or relevant and difficult to integrate into daily practice. In designing CDSS interventions we suggest to more intensely involve the end-users and increase the system’s flexibility and learning capacity. To improve implementation a proper introduction of a CDSS among its target group including adequate training is advocated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials NCT01773057. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-015-0364-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4608282
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46082822015-10-17 Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation Lugtenberg, Marjolein Pasveer, Dennis van der Weijden, Trudy Westert, Gert P. Kool, Rudolf B. BMC Fam Pract Research Article BACKGROUND: Trials evaluating the effects of interventions usually provide little insight into the factors responsible for (lack of) changes in desired outcomes. A process evaluation alongside a trial can shed light on the mechanisms responsible for the outcomes of a trial. The aim of this study was to investigate exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support system (CDSS) intervention, in order to gain insight into the intervention’s impact and to provide suggestions for improvement. METHODS: A process evaluation was conducted as part of a large-scale cluster-randomized controlled trial investigating the effects of the CDSS NHGDoc on quality of care. Data on exposure to and experiences with the intervention were collected during the trial period among participants in both the intervention and control group - whenever applicable - by means of the NHGDoc server and an electronic questionnaire. Multiple data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Ninety-nine percent (n = 229) of the included practices generated data for the NHGDoc server and 50 % (n = 116) responded to the questionnaire: both general practitioners (GPs; n = 112; 49 %) and practice nurses (PNs; n = 52; 37 %) participated. The actual exposure to the NHGDoc system and specific heart failure module was limited with 52 % of the GPs and 42 % of the PNs reporting to either never or rarely use the system. Overall, users had a positive attitude towards CDSSs. The most perceived barriers to using NHGDoc were a lack of learning capacity of the system, the additional time and work it requires to use the CDSS, irrelevant alerts, too high intensity of alerts and insufficient knowledge regarding the system. CONCLUSIONS: Several types of barriers may have negatively affected the impact of the intervention. Although users are generally positive about CDSSs, a large share of them is insufficiently aware of the functions of NHGDoc and, finds the decision support not always useful or relevant and difficult to integrate into daily practice. In designing CDSS interventions we suggest to more intensely involve the end-users and increase the system’s flexibility and learning capacity. To improve implementation a proper introduction of a CDSS among its target group including adequate training is advocated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials NCT01773057. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-015-0364-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4608282/ /pubmed/26474603 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0364-0 Text en © Lugtenberg et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lugtenberg, Marjolein
Pasveer, Dennis
van der Weijden, Trudy
Westert, Gert P.
Kool, Rudolf B.
Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation
title Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation
title_full Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation
title_fullStr Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation
title_short Exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation
title_sort exposure to and experiences with a computerized decision support intervention in primary care: results from a process evaluation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4608282/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26474603
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-015-0364-0
work_keys_str_mv AT lugtenbergmarjolein exposuretoandexperienceswithacomputerizeddecisionsupportinterventioninprimarycareresultsfromaprocessevaluation
AT pasveerdennis exposuretoandexperienceswithacomputerizeddecisionsupportinterventioninprimarycareresultsfromaprocessevaluation
AT vanderweijdentrudy exposuretoandexperienceswithacomputerizeddecisionsupportinterventioninprimarycareresultsfromaprocessevaluation
AT westertgertp exposuretoandexperienceswithacomputerizeddecisionsupportinterventioninprimarycareresultsfromaprocessevaluation
AT koolrudolfb exposuretoandexperienceswithacomputerizeddecisionsupportinterventioninprimarycareresultsfromaprocessevaluation