Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15755945/ below:

Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review

Review

Affiliations

• ¹ Division of Nephrology, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.

• PMID: 15755945
• DOI: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1223

Item in Clipboard

Review

Amit X Garg et al. JAMA. 2005.

• ¹ Division of Nephrology, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.

• PMID: 15755945
• DOI: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1223

Item in Clipboard

Context: Developers of health care software have attributed improvements in patient care to these applications. As with any health care intervention, such claims require confirmation in clinical trials.

Objectives: To review controlled trials assessing the effects of computerized clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and to identify study characteristics predicting benefit.

Data sources: We updated our earlier reviews by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Inspec, and ISI databases and consulting reference lists through September 2004. Authors of 64 primary studies confirmed data or provided additional information.

Study selection: We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials that evaluated the effect of a CDSS compared with care provided without a CDSS on practitioner performance or patient outcomes.

Data extraction: Teams of 2 reviewers independently abstracted data on methods, setting, CDSS and patient characteristics, and outcomes.

Data synthesis: One hundred studies met our inclusion criteria. The number and methodologic quality of studies improved over time. The CDSS improved practitioner performance in 62 (64%) of the 97 studies assessing this outcome, including 4 (40%) of 10 diagnostic systems, 16 (76%) of 21 reminder systems, 23 (62%) of 37 disease management systems, and 19 (66%) of 29 drug-dosing or prescribing systems. Fifty-two trials assessed 1 or more patient outcomes, of which 7 trials (13%) reported improvements. Improved practitioner performance was associated with CDSSs that automatically prompted users compared with requiring users to activate the system (success in 73% of trials vs 47%; P = .02) and studies in which the authors also developed the CDSS software compared with studies in which the authors were not the developers (74% success vs 28%; respectively, P = .001).

Conclusions: Many CDSSs improve practitioner performance. To date, the effects on patient outcomes remain understudied and, when studied, inconsistent.

PubMed Disclaimer

• Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review.

  Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith K. Hunt DL, et al. JAMA. 1998 Oct 21;280(15):1339-46. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.15.1339. JAMA. 1998. PMID: 9794315

• Computerised decision support systems in order communication for diagnostic, screening or monitoring test ordering: systematic reviews of the effects and cost-effectiveness of systems.

  Main C, Moxham T, Wyatt JC, Kay J, Anderson R, Stein K. Main C, et al. Health Technol Assess. 2010 Oct;14(48):1-227. doi: 10.3310/hta14480. Health Technol Assess. 2010. PMID: 21034668 Review.

• Computerized decision support systems in primary care for type 2 diabetes patients only improve patients' outcomes when combined with feedback on performance and case management: a systematic review.

  Cleveringa FG, Gorter KJ, van den Donk M, van Gijsel J, Rutten GE. Cleveringa FG, et al. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013 Feb;15(2):180-92. doi: 10.1089/dia.2012.0201. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013. PMID: 23360424 Review.

• The impact of pharmacy computerised clinical decision support on prescribing, clinical and patient outcomes: a systematic review of the literature.

  Robertson J, Walkom E, Pearson SA, Hains I, Williamsone M, Newby D. Robertson J, et al. Int J Pharm Pract. 2010 Apr;18(2):69-87. Int J Pharm Pract. 2010. PMID: 20441116 Review.

• Effects of computerized decision support systems on nursing performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review.

  Randell R, Mitchell N, Dowding D, Cullum N, Thompson C. Randell R, et al. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007 Oct;12(4):242-9. doi: 10.1258/135581907782101543. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007. PMID: 17925077 Review.

• Patient clinical profiles associated with physician non-compliance despite the use of a guideline-based decision support system: a case study with OncoDoc2 using data mining techniques.

  Séroussi B, Soulet A, Messai N, Laouénan C, Mentré F, Bouaud J. Séroussi B, et al. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2012;2012:828-37. Epub 2012 Nov 3. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2012. PMID: 23304357 Free PMC article.

• Convolutional-de-convolutional neural networks for recognition of surgical workflow.

  Chen YW, Zhang J, Wang P, Hu ZY, Zhong KH. Chen YW, et al. Front Comput Neurosci. 2022 Sep 7;16:998096. doi: 10.3389/fncom.2022.998096. eCollection 2022. Front Comput Neurosci. 2022. PMID: 36157842 Free PMC article.

• Using computerised decision support to improve compliance of cancer multidisciplinary meetings with evidence-based guidance.

  Patkar V, Acosta D, Davidson T, Jones A, Fox J, Keshtgar M. Patkar V, et al. BMJ Open. 2012 Jun 25;2(3):e000439. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000439. Print 2012. BMJ Open. 2012. PMID: 22734113 Free PMC article.

• Renal Drug Dosing. Effectiveness of Outpatient Pharmacist-Based vs. Prescriber-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems.

  Vogel EA, Billups SJ, Herner SJ, Delate T. Vogel EA, et al. Appl Clin Inform. 2016 Jul 27;7(3):731-44. doi: 10.4338/ACI-2016-01-RA-0010. Appl Clin Inform. 2016. PMID: 27466041 Free PMC article.

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.3