Cargando…
Electronic Health Record-Integrated Clinical Decision Support for Clinicians Serving Populations Facing Health Care Disparities: Literature Review
Objectives : To review current studies about designing and implementing clinician-facing clinical decision support (CDS) integrated or interoperable with an electronic health record (EHR) to improve health care for populations facing disparities. Methods : We searched PubMed to identify studies publ...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
2022
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9719761/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36463877 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1742518 |
Sumario: | Objectives : To review current studies about designing and implementing clinician-facing clinical decision support (CDS) integrated or interoperable with an electronic health record (EHR) to improve health care for populations facing disparities. Methods : We searched PubMed to identify studies published between January 1, 2011 and October 22, 2021 about clinician-facing CDS integrated or interoperable with an EHR. We screened abstracts and titles and extracted study data from articles using a protocol developed by team consensus. Extracted data included patient population characteristics, clinical specialty, setting, EHR, clinical problem, CDS type, reported user-centered design, implementation strategies, and outcomes. Results : There were 28 studies (36 articles) included. Most studies were performed at safety net institutions (14 studies) or Indian Health Service sites (6 studies). CDS tools were implemented in primary care outpatient settings in 24 studies (86%) for screening or treatment. CDS included point-of-care alerts (93%), order facilitators (46%), workflow support (39%), relevant information display (36%), expert systems (11%), and medication dosing support (7%). Successful outcomes were reported in 19 of 26 studies that reported outcomes (73%). User-centered design was reported during CDS planning (39%), development (32%), and implementation phase (25%). Most frequent implementation strategies were education (89%) and consensus facilitation (50%). Conclusions : CDS tools may improve health equity and outcomes for patients who face disparities. The present review underscores the need for high-quality analyses of CDS-associated health outcomes, reporting of user-centered design and implementation strategies used in low-resource settings, and methods to disseminate CDS created to improve health equity. |
---|