Cargando…

Barriers to the Use of Clinical Decision Support for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND: Clinicians often disregard potentially beneficial clinical decision support (CDS). OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to explore the psychological and behavioral barriers to the use of a CDS tool. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study involving emergency medicine physicians and phys...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Richardson, Safiya, Dauber-Decker, Katherine L, McGinn, Thomas, Barnaby, Douglas P, Cattamanchi, Adithya, Pekmezaris, Renee
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8374661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34346901
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/25046
_version_ 1783740164210688000
author Richardson, Safiya
Dauber-Decker, Katherine L
McGinn, Thomas
Barnaby, Douglas P
Cattamanchi, Adithya
Pekmezaris, Renee
author_facet Richardson, Safiya
Dauber-Decker, Katherine L
McGinn, Thomas
Barnaby, Douglas P
Cattamanchi, Adithya
Pekmezaris, Renee
author_sort Richardson, Safiya
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinicians often disregard potentially beneficial clinical decision support (CDS). OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to explore the psychological and behavioral barriers to the use of a CDS tool. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study involving emergency medicine physicians and physician assistants. A semistructured interview guide was created based on the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation-Behavior model. Interviews focused on the barriers to the use of a CDS tool built based on Wells’ criteria for pulmonary embolism to assist clinicians in establishing pretest probability of pulmonary embolism before imaging. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 12 clinicians. Six barriers were identified, including (1) Bayesian reasoning, (2) fear of missing a pulmonary embolism, (3) time pressure or cognitive load, (4) gestalt includes Wells’ criteria, (5) missed risk factors, and (6) social pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians highlighted several important psychological and behavioral barriers to CDS use. Addressing these barriers will be paramount in developing CDS that can meet its potential to transform clinical care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8374661
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83746612021-08-24 Barriers to the Use of Clinical Decision Support for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: Qualitative Interview Study Richardson, Safiya Dauber-Decker, Katherine L McGinn, Thomas Barnaby, Douglas P Cattamanchi, Adithya Pekmezaris, Renee JMIR Hum Factors Original Paper BACKGROUND: Clinicians often disregard potentially beneficial clinical decision support (CDS). OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to explore the psychological and behavioral barriers to the use of a CDS tool. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study involving emergency medicine physicians and physician assistants. A semistructured interview guide was created based on the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation-Behavior model. Interviews focused on the barriers to the use of a CDS tool built based on Wells’ criteria for pulmonary embolism to assist clinicians in establishing pretest probability of pulmonary embolism before imaging. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 12 clinicians. Six barriers were identified, including (1) Bayesian reasoning, (2) fear of missing a pulmonary embolism, (3) time pressure or cognitive load, (4) gestalt includes Wells’ criteria, (5) missed risk factors, and (6) social pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians highlighted several important psychological and behavioral barriers to CDS use. Addressing these barriers will be paramount in developing CDS that can meet its potential to transform clinical care. JMIR Publications 2021-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8374661/ /pubmed/34346901 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/25046 Text en ©Safiya Richardson, Katherine L Dauber-Decker, Thomas McGinn, Douglas P Barnaby, Adithya Cattamanchi, Renee Pekmezaris. Originally published in JMIR Human Factors (https://humanfactors.jmir.org), 04.08.2021. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Human Factors, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://humanfactors.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Richardson, Safiya
Dauber-Decker, Katherine L
McGinn, Thomas
Barnaby, Douglas P
Cattamanchi, Adithya
Pekmezaris, Renee
Barriers to the Use of Clinical Decision Support for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: Qualitative Interview Study
title Barriers to the Use of Clinical Decision Support for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: Qualitative Interview Study
title_full Barriers to the Use of Clinical Decision Support for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: Qualitative Interview Study
title_fullStr Barriers to the Use of Clinical Decision Support for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: Qualitative Interview Study
title_full_unstemmed Barriers to the Use of Clinical Decision Support for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: Qualitative Interview Study
title_short Barriers to the Use of Clinical Decision Support for the Evaluation of Pulmonary Embolism: Qualitative Interview Study
title_sort barriers to the use of clinical decision support for the evaluation of pulmonary embolism: qualitative interview study
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8374661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34346901
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/25046
work_keys_str_mv AT richardsonsafiya barrierstotheuseofclinicaldecisionsupportfortheevaluationofpulmonaryembolismqualitativeinterviewstudy
AT dauberdeckerkatherinel barrierstotheuseofclinicaldecisionsupportfortheevaluationofpulmonaryembolismqualitativeinterviewstudy
AT mcginnthomas barrierstotheuseofclinicaldecisionsupportfortheevaluationofpulmonaryembolismqualitativeinterviewstudy
AT barnabydouglasp barrierstotheuseofclinicaldecisionsupportfortheevaluationofpulmonaryembolismqualitativeinterviewstudy
AT cattamanchiadithya barrierstotheuseofclinicaldecisionsupportfortheevaluationofpulmonaryembolismqualitativeinterviewstudy
AT pekmezarisrenee barrierstotheuseofclinicaldecisionsupportfortheevaluationofpulmonaryembolismqualitativeinterviewstudy