Search

A collaboratively maintained, centralized web-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) repository could lead to improved quality and standardization of care and decrease duplication of resources. Ruby on Rails (RoR) is an open source web application framework that enables rapid iterative development of database backed applications. We have created a prototype form building application in RoR that has the potential to create and maintain such a CDSS repository. Further study and refinement are required.

Introduction: Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have the potential to reduce adverse medical events, but improper design can introduce new forms of error. CDSS pertaining to community acquired pneumonia and neutropenic fever were studied to determine whether usability of the graphical user interface might contribute to potential adverse medical events., Methods: Automated screen capture of 4 CDSS being used by volunteer emergency physicians was analyzed using structured methods., Results: 422 events were recorded over 56 sessions. In total, 169 negative comments, 55 positive comments, 130 neutral comments, 21 application events, 34 problems, 6 slips, and 5 mistakes were identified. Three mistakes could have had life-threatening consequences., Conclusion: Evaluation of CDSS will be of utmost importance in the future with increasing use of electronic health records. Usability engineering principles can identify interface problems that may lead to potential medical adverse events, and should be incorporated early in the software design phase.

Objectives: Despite studies that show improvements in both standards of care and outcomes with the judicious application of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), their clinical utilization remains low. This randomized controlled trial examined the use of a wirelessly networked mobile computer (MC) by physicians at the bedside with access to an emergency department information system, decision support tools (DSTs), and other software options., Methods: Each of ten volunteer emergency physicians was randomized using a matched-pair design to work five shifts in standard fashion (desktop computer [DC] access) and five shifts with a wirelessly networked MC. Work pattern issues and electronic CPG/DST use were compared using end-of-shift satisfaction questionnaires and review of a CPG/DST database. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to examine between-shift differences., Results: A total of 100 eight-hour shifts were evaluated; 99% compliance with postshift questionnaires was achieved. Using a seven-point Likert scale (MC values first), MCs were rated as being as fast (5.04 vs. 4.54; p=0.13) and convenient (5.08 vs. 4.14; p=0.07) as DCs. Overall, physicians rated MCs to be less efficient (3.18 vs. 4.30; p=0.02) but encouraged more frequent use of DSTs (4.10 vs. 3.47; p=0.03) without impacting doctor-patient communication (2.78 vs. 2.96; p=0.51). During the study period, physician use of an intranet Web application (eCPG) was more frequent during shifts assigned to the MC when compared with the DC (eCPG uses/shift, 3.6 vs. 2.0; p=0.033)., Conclusions: The MC technology permitted physicians to access information at the bedside and increased the use of CPG/DST tools. According to physicians, patients appeared to accept their use of information technology to assist in decision making. Development of improved computer technology may address the major limitation of MC portability.