Using a Clinical Decision Support System to Improve Anticoagulation in Patients with Nonvalve Atrial Fibrillation in China’s Primary Care Settings: A Feasibility Study

Background. To primarily investigate the effect of using a clinical decision support system (CDSS) in community health centers in Shanghai, China, on the proportion of patients prescribed guideline-directed antithrombotic therapy. This study also gauged the general practitioner (GP)’s acceptance of the CDSS who worked in the atrial fibrillation (AF) special consulting room of the CDSS group. Methods. This was a prospective cohort study that included a semistructured interview and a feasibility study for a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Eligible patients who sought medical care in the AF special consulting rooms in two community health centers in Shanghai, China, between April 1, 2020, and October 1, 2020, were enrolled, and their medical records from the enrollment date, up to October 1, 2021, were extracted. Based on whether the GPs in the AF special consulting rooms of the two sites used the CDSS or not, we classified the two sites as a software group and a control group. The CDSS could automatically assess the risks of stroke and bleeding and provide suggestions on treatment, follow-up, adjustment of anticoagulants or dosage, and other items. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients prescribed guideline-directed antithrombotic therapy. We also conducted a semistructured interview with the GP in the AF special consulting rooms of the software group regarding the acceptance of the CDSS and suggestions on the optimization of the CDSS and the study protocol of the cluster-randomized controlled trial in the future. Results. Eighty-four patients completed the follow-up. The mean age of these subjects was 75.71 years, the median time of clinical visits was six times per person, and the follow-up duration was 15 months. The basic demographics were similar between the two groups, except for age (t = 2.109, p = 0.038) and the HAS-BLED score (χ2 = 4.363, p = 0.037). The primary outcome in the software group was 8.071 times higher than that in the control group (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 8.071, 95% confidence interval (2.570–25.344), p