scholarly journals A Clinical Decision Support System Design Framework for Nursing Practice

ACI Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 05 (02) ◽  
pp. e84-e93
Author(s):  
Sheng-Chieh Lu ◽  
Rebecca J. Brown ◽  
Martin Michalowski
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Case ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Knowledge Resources ◽  
Clinical Nurses ◽  
Complex Patient ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Common Architecture

Abstract Background As nurses increasingly engage in decision-making for patients, a unique opportunity exists to translate research into practice using clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). While research has shown that CDSS has led to improvements in patient outcomes and nursing workflow, the success rate of CDSS implementation in nursing is low. Further, the majority of CDSS for nursing are not designed to support the care of patients with comorbidity. Objectives The aim of the study is to conceptualize an evidence-based CDSS supporting complex patient care for nursing. Methods We conceptualized the CDSS through extracting scientific findings of CDSS design and development. To describe the CDSS, we developed a conceptual framework comprising the key components of the CDSS and the relationships between the components. We instantiated the framework in the context of a hypothetical clinical case. Results We present the conceptualized CDSS with a framework comprising six interrelated components and demonstrate how each component is implemented via a hypothetical clinical case. Conclusion The proposed framework provides a common architecture for CDSS development and bridges CDSS research findings and development. Next research steps include (1) working with clinical nurses to identify their knowledge resources for a particular disease to better articulate the knowledge base needed by a CDSS, (2) develop and deploy a CDSS in practice using the framework, and (3) evaluate the CDSS in the context of nursing care.

Architectures for Architects

1993 ◽  
Vol 32 (01) ◽  
pp. 12-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Musen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Design And Development

Abstract:Response to Heathfield HA, Wyatt J. Philosophies for the design and development of clinical decision-support systems. Meth Inform Med 1993; 32: 1-8.

Characterizing Decision Support Telemedicine Systems

2006 ◽  
Vol 45 (05) ◽  
pp. 523-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Abu-Hanna ◽  
B. Nannings
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Problem Dimension ◽  
Process Dimension

Summary Objectives: Decision Support Telemedicine Systems (DSTS) are at the intersection of two disciplines: telemedicine and clinical decision support systems (CDSS). The objective of this paper is to provide a set of characterizing properties for DSTSs. This characterizing property set (CPS) can be used for typing, classifying and clustering DSTSs. Methods: We performed a systematic keyword-based literature search to identify candidate-characterizing properties. We selected a subset of candidates and refined them by assessing their potential in order to obtain the CPS. Results: The CPS consists of 14 properties, which can be used for the uniform description and typing of applications of DSTSs. The properties are grouped in three categories that we refer to as the problem dimension, process dimension, and system dimension. We provide CPS instantiations for three prototypical applications. Conclusions: The CPS includes important properties for typing DSTSs, focusing on aspects of communication for the telemedicine part and on aspects of decisionmaking for the CDSS part. The CPS provides users with tools for uniformly describing DSTSs.

scholarly journals The acceptance of clinical decision support systems among clinicians in the treatment of neck and/or back pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
S M Jansen-Kosterink ◽  
M Cabrita ◽  
I Flierman
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Case Based Reasoning ◽  
Online Questionnaire

Abstract Background Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSSs) are computerized systems using case-based reasoning to assist clinicians in making clinical decisions. Despite the proven added value to public health, the implementation of CDSS clinical practice is scarce. Particularly, little is known about the acceptance of CDSS among clinicians. Within the Back-UP project (Project Number: H2020-SC1-2017-CNECT-2-777090) a CDSS is developed with prognostic models to improve the management of Neck and/or Low Back Pain (NLBP). Therefore, the aim of this study is to present the factors involved in the acceptance of CDSSs among clinicians. Methods To assess the acceptance of CDSSs among clinicians we conducted a mixed method analysis of questionnaires and focus groups. An online questionnaire with a low-fidelity prototype of a CDSS (TRL3) was sent to Dutch clinicians aimed to identify the factors influencing the acceptance of CDSSs (intention to use, perceived threat to professional autonomy, trusting believes and perceived usefulness). Next to this, two focus groups were conducted with clinicians addressing the general attitudes towards CDSSs, the factors determining the level of acceptance, and the conditions to facilitate use of CDSSs. Results A pilot-study of the online questionnaire is completed and the results of the large evaluation are expected spring 2020. Eight clinicians participated in two focus groups. After being introduced to various types of CDSSs, participants were positive about the value of CDSS in the care of NLBP. The clinicians agreed that the human touch in NLBP care must be preserved and that CDSSs must remain a supporting tool, and not a replacement of their role as professionals. Conclusions By identifying the factors hindering the acceptance of CDSSs we can draw implications for implementation of CDSSs in the treatment of NLBP.

scholarly journals Applicability of Clinical Decision Support in Management among Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery in Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 2880
Author(s):  
Miguel Pereira ◽  
Patricia Concheiro-Moscoso ◽  
Alexo López-Álvarez ◽  
Gerardo Baños ◽  
Alejandro Pazos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Real Time Information ◽  
Time Information ◽  
Improve Patient

The advances achieved in recent decades regarding cardiac surgery have led to a new risk that goes beyond surgeons' dexterity; postoperative hours are crucial for cardiac surgery patients and are usually spent in intensive care units (ICUs), where the patients need to be continuously monitored to adjust their treatment. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have been developed to take this real-time information and provide clinical suggestions to physicians in order to reduce medical errors and to improve patient recovery. In this review, an initial total of 499 papers were considered after identification using PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL. Twenty-two studies were included after filtering, which included the deletion of duplications and the exclusion of titles or abstracts that were not of real interest. A review of these papers concluded the applicability and advances that CDSSs offer for both doctors and patients. Better prognosis and recovery rates are achieved by using this technology, which has also received high acceptance among most physicians. However, despite the evidence that well-designed CDSSs are effective, they still need to be refined to offer the best assistance possible, which may still take time, despite the promising models that have already been applied in real ICUs.

scholarly journals Barriers and facilitators to the adoption of electronic clinical decision support systems: a qualitative interview study with UK general practitioners

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Ford ◽  
Natalie Edelman ◽  
Laura Somers ◽  
Duncan Shrewsbury ◽  
Marcela Lopez Levy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Qualitative Interview Study ◽  
High Level

Abstract Background Well-established electronic data capture in UK general practice means that algorithms, developed on patient data, can be used for automated clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). These can predict patient risk, help with prescribing safety, improve diagnosis and prompt clinicians to record extra data. However, there is persistent evidence of low uptake of CDSSs in the clinic. We interviewed UK General Practitioners (GPs) to understand what features of CDSSs, and the contexts of their use, facilitate or present barriers to their use. Methods We interviewed 11 practicing GPs in London and South England using a semi-structured interview schedule and discussed a hypothetical CDSS that could detect early signs of dementia. We applied thematic analysis to the anonymised interview transcripts. Results We identified three overarching themes: trust in individual CDSSs; usability of individual CDSSs; and usability of CDSSs in the broader practice context, to which nine subthemes contributed. Trust was affected by CDSS provenance, perceived threat to autonomy and clear management guidance. Usability was influenced by sensitivity to the patient context, CDSS flexibility, ease of control, and non-intrusiveness. CDSSs were more likely to be used by GPs if they did not contribute to alert proliferation and subsequent fatigue, or if GPs were provided with training in their use. Conclusions Building on these findings we make a number of recommendations for CDSS developers to consider when bringing a new CDSS into GP patient records systems. These include co-producing CDSS with GPs to improve fit within clinic workflow and wider practice systems, ensuring a high level of accuracy and a clear clinical pathway, and providing CDSS training for practice staff. These recommendations may reduce the proliferation of unhelpful alerts that can result in important decision-support being ignored.

Massive transfusion experience, current practice and decision support: A survey of Australian and New Zealand anaesthetists

2021 ◽  
pp. 0310057X2097403
Author(s):  
Brenton J Sanderson ◽  
Jeremy D Field ◽  
Lise J Estcourt ◽  
Erica M Wood ◽  
Enrico W Coiera
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Massive Transfusion ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Transfusion Practice

Massive transfusions guided by massive transfusion protocols are commonly used to manage critical bleeding, when the patient is at significant risk of morbidity and mortality, and multiple timely decisions must be made by clinicians. Clinical decision support systems are increasingly used to provide patient-specific recommendations by comparing patient information to a knowledge base, and have been shown to improve patient outcomes. To investigate current massive transfusion practice and the experiences and attitudes of anaesthetists towards massive transfusion and clinical decision support systems, we anonymously surveyed 1000 anaesthetists and anaesthesia trainees across Australia and New Zealand. A total of 228 surveys (23.6%) were successfully completed and 227 were analysed for a 23.3% response rate. Most respondents were involved in massive transfusions infrequently (88.1% managed five or fewer massive transfusion protocols per year) and worked at hospitals which have massive transfusion protocols (89.4%). Massive transfusion management was predominantly limited by timely access to point-of-care coagulation assessment and by competition with other tasks, with trainees reporting more significant limitations compared to specialists. The majority of respondents reported that they were likely, or very likely, both to use (73.1%) and to trust (85%) a clinical decision support system for massive transfusions, with no significant difference between anaesthesia trainees and specialists ( P = 0.375 and P = 0.73, respectively). While the response rate to our survey was poor, there was still a wide range of massive transfusion experience among respondents, with multiple subjective factors identified limiting massive transfusion practice. We identified several potential design features and barriers to implementation to assist with the future development of a clinical decision support system for massive transfusion, and overall wide support for a clinical decision support system for massive transfusion among respondents.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document