Cargando…

Assessing the use of a clinical decision support tool for pain management in primary care

OBJECTIVE: Given time constraints, poorly organized information, and complex patients, primary care providers (PCPs) can benefit from clinical decision support (CDS) tools that aggregate and synthesize problem-specific patient information. First, this article describes the design and functionality o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Apathy, Nate C, Sanner, Lindsey, Adams, Meredith C B, Mamlin, Burke W, Grout, Randall W, Fortin, Saura, Hillstrom, Jennifer, Saha, Amit, Teal, Evgenia, Vest, Joshua R, Menachemi, Nir, Hurley, Robert W, Harle, Christopher A, Mazurenko, Olena
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9476612/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128342
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooac074
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: Given time constraints, poorly organized information, and complex patients, primary care providers (PCPs) can benefit from clinical decision support (CDS) tools that aggregate and synthesize problem-specific patient information. First, this article describes the design and functionality of a CDS tool for chronic noncancer pain in primary care. Second, we report on the retrospective analysis of real-world usage of the tool in the context of a pragmatic trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The tool known as OneSheet was developed using user-centered principles and built in the Epic electronic health record (EHR) of 2 health systems. For each relevant patient, OneSheet presents pertinent information in a single EHR view to assist PCPs in completing guideline-recommended opioid risk mitigation tasks, review previous and current patient treatments, view patient-reported pain, physical function, and pain-related goals. RESULTS: Overall, 69 PCPs accessed OneSheet 2411 times (since November 2020). PCP use of OneSheet varied significantly by provider and was highly skewed (site 1: median accesses per provider: 17 [interquartile range (IQR) 9–32]; site 2: median: 8 [IQR 5–16]). Seven “power users” accounted for 70% of the overall access instances across both sites. OneSheet has been accessed an average of 20 times weekly between the 2 sites. DISCUSSION: Modest OneSheet use was observed relative to the number of eligible patients seen with chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Organizations implementing CDS tools are likely to see considerable provider-level variation in usage, suggesting that CDS tools may vary in their utility across PCPs, even for the same condition, because of differences in provider and care team workflows.