Search

Objective: We conducted a horizon scan to (1) identify challenges in patient-centered clinical decision support (PC CDS) and (2) identify future directions for PC CDS.Materials and Methods: We engaged a technical expert panel, conducted a scoping literature review, and interviewed key informants. We qualitatively analyzed literature and interview transcripts, mapping findings to the 4 phases for translating evidence into PC CDS interventions (Prioritizing, Authoring, Implementing, and Measuring) and to external factors.Results: We identified 12 challenges for PC CDS development. Lack of patient input was identified as a critical challenge. The key informants noted that patient input is critical to prioritizing topics for PC CDS and to ensuring that CDS aligns with patients' routine behaviors. Lack of patient-centered terminology standards was viewed as a challenge in authoring PC CDS. We found a dearth of CDS studies that measured clinical outcomes, creating significant gaps in our understanding of PC CDS' impact. Across all phases of CDS development, there is a lack of patient and provider trust and limited attention to patients' and providers' concerns.Discussion: These challenges suggest opportunities for advancing PC CDS. There are opportunities to develop industry-wide practices and standards to increase transparency, standardize terminologies, and incorporate patient input. There is also opportunity to engage patients throughout the PC CDS research process to ensure that outcome measures are relevant to their needs.Conclusion: Addressing these challenges and embracing these opportunities will help realize the promise of PC CDS-placing patients at the center of the healthcare system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Supporting healthcare decision-making that is patient-centered and evidence-based requires investments in the development of tools and techniques for dissemination of patient-centered outcomes research findings via methods such as clinical decision support (CDS). This article explores the technical landscape for patient-centered CDS (PC CDS) and the gaps in making PC CDS more shareable, standards-based, and publicly available, with the goal of improving patient care and clinical outcomes. This landscape assessment used: (1) a technical expert panel; (2) a literature review; and (3) interviews with 18 CDS stakeholders. We identified 7 salient technical considerations that span 5 phases of PC CDS development. While progress has been made in the technical landscape, the field must advance standards for translating clinical guidelines into PC CDS, the standardization of CDS insertion points into the clinical workflow, and processes to capture, standardize, and integrate patient-generated health data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medicaid beneficiaries in 6 North Carolina counties were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 clinical decision support (CDS) care transition strategies: (1) usual care (Control), (2) CDS messaging to patients and their medical homes (Reports), or (3) CDS messaging to patients, their medical homes, and their care managers (Reports+). We included 7146 Medicaid patients and evaluated transitions from specialist visit, ER and hospital encounters back to the patient's medical home. Patients enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid were not eligible. The number of care manager contacts was greater for patients in the Reports+ Group than in the Control Group. However, there were no treatment-related differences in emergency department (ED) encounter rates, or in the secondary outcomes of outpatient and hospital encounter rates and medical costs. Study monitors found study intervention documentation in approximately 60% of patient charts. These results highlight the importance of effectively integrating information interventions into healthcare delivery workflow systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although evidence-based pharmacotherapies are a principal component of patient care, 30-50% of patients do not take their medications as prescribed. We conducted a randomized trial of two clinical decision support (CDS) interventions in 2219 patients: patient adherence reports to providers (n=744), patient adherence reports to providers + email notices to care managers (n=736), and controls (739). At 18-month follow-up, there were no treatment-related differences in patient medication adherence (overall, by medication class, and by medical condition). There also were no treatment-related differences in patient clinical and economic outcomes. Thus, while this study's CDS information interventions were successfully delivered to providers and care managers, and were effective in identifying medication adherence deficits and in increasing care manager responses to medication adherences issues, these interventions were not able to alter patient medication behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Governments are investing in health information technologies (HIT) to improve care quality and reduce medical costs. However, evidence of these benefits is limited. We conducted a randomized trial of three clinical decision support (CDS) interventions in 20,180 patients: email to care managers (n=3329), reports to primary care administrators (n=3368), letters to patients (n=3401), and controls (10,082). At 7-month follow-up, the letters to patients group had greater use of outpatient services and higher outpatient and total medical costs; whereas, the other groups had no change in clinical events or medical costs. As our CDS interventions were associated with no change or an increase in medical costs, it appears that investments in HIT without consideration for organizational context may not be sufficient to achieve improvements in clinical and economic outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Replication studies evaluate technologies in usual use settings. Methods: We conducted a clinical trial to determine whether reductions in clinical and economic results observed in a previous study could be replicated in a larger setting. Subjects were randomized to receive intervention (email notifications for sentinel health events sent to their care managers) or control. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the rate of emergency department visits for low severity conditions. Secondary outcomes included: medical costs and other clinical event rates. Results: We randomized 13,454 individuals (intervention, 6740; control, 6714). Subjects in both groups had similar rates of clinical events and medical costs. Conclusion: The use of email notifications to care managers was associated with no reductions in clinical events or medical costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical decision support is recognized as one potential remedy for the growing crisis in healthcare quality in the United States and other industrialized nations. While decision support systems have been shown to improve care quality and reduce errors, these systems are not widely available. This lack of availability arises in part because most decision support systems are not portable or scalable. The Health Level 7 international standard development organization recently adopted a draft standard known as the Decision Support Service standard to facilitate the implementation of clinical decision support systems using software services. In this paper, we report the first implementation of a clinical decision support system using this new standard. This system provides point-of-care chronic disease management for diabetes and other conditions and is deployed throughout a large regional health system. We also report process measures and usability data concerning the system. Use of the Decision Support Service standard provides a portable and scalable approach to clinical decision support that could facilitate the more extensive use of decision support systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Clinical guidelines are available to enhance symptom management during cancer treatment but often are not used in the practice setting. Clinical decision support can facilitate the implementation and adherence to clinical guidelines. and improve the quality of cancer care.Objectives: Clinical decision support offers an innovative approach to integrate guideline-based symptom management into oncology care. This study evaluated the effect of clinical decision support-based recommendations on clinical management of symptoms and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) among outpatients with lung cancer.Methods: Twenty providers and 179 patients were allotted in group randomization to attention control (AC) or Symptom Assessment and Management Intervention (SAMI) arms. SAMI entailed patient-report of symptoms and delivery of recommendations to manage pain, fatigue, dyspnea, depression, and anxiety; AC entailed symptom reporting prior to the visit. Outcomes were collected at baseline, two, four and six-months. Adherence to recommendations was assessed through masked chart review. HR-QOL was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire. Descriptive statistics with linear and logistic regression accounting for the clustering structure of the design and a modified chi-square test were used for analyses.Results: Median age of patients was 63 years, 58% female, 88% white, and 32% ≤high school education. Significant differences in clinical management were evident in SAMI vs. AC for all target symptoms that passed threshold. Patients in SAMI were more likely to receive sustained-release opioids for constant pain, adjuvant medications for neuropathic pain, opioids for dyspnea, stimulants for fatigue and mental health referrals for anxiety. However, there were no statistically significant differences in HR-QOL at any time point.Conclusion: SAMI improved clinical management for all target symptoms but did not improve patient outcomes. A larger study is warranted to evaluate effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context Distressing symptoms interfere with the quality of life in patients with lung cancer. Algorithm-based clinical decision support (CDS) to improve evidence-based management of isolated symptoms seems promising, but no reports yet address multiple symptoms. Objectives This study examined the feasibility of CDS for a Symptom Assessment and Management Intervention targeting common symptoms in patients with lung cancer (SAMI-L) in ambulatory oncology. The study objectives were to evaluate completion and delivery rates of the SAMI-L report and clinician adherence to the algorithm-based recommendations. Methods Patients completed a web-based symptom assessment and SAMI-L created tailored recommendations for symptom management. Completion of assessments and delivery of reports were recorded. Medical record review assessed clinician adherence to recommendations. Feasibility was defined as 75% or higher report completion and delivery rates and 80% or higher clinician adherence to recommendations. Descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations were used for data analyses. Results Symptom assessment completion was 84% (95% CI = 81–87%). Delivery of completed reports was 90% (95% CI = 86–93%). Depression (36%), pain (30%), and fatigue (18%) occurred most frequently, followed by anxiety (11%) and dyspnea (6%). On average, overall recommendation adherence was 57% (95% CI = 52–62%) and was not dependent on the number of recommendations ( P = 0.45). Adherence was higher for anxiety (66%; 95% CI = 55–77%), depression (64%; 95% CI = 56–71%), pain (62%; 95% CI = 52–72%), and dyspnea (51%; 95% CI = 38–64%) than for fatigue (38%; 95% CI = 28–47%). Conclusion The CDS systems, such as SAMI-L, have the potential to fill a gap in promoting evidence-based care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]