The value of pathways on drug costs.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 327-327
Author(s):  
Valerie Pracilio Csik ◽  
Michael J. Ramirez ◽  
Adam F Binder ◽  
Nathan Handley
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Weighted Average ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Treatment Decisions ◽  
Drug Costs ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Significant Variable ◽  
Oncology Care ◽  
The Impact

327 Background: Oncology care represents a significant portion of US healthcare spending. Cost of Part B drugs has increased at a rate 5.7x that of overall Medicare spending. As a participant in the Oncology Care Model, drug costs represent a majority of our total costs. Pathways are a clinical decision-support tool that use evidence-based care maps accounting for efficacy, toxicity and cost. Our NCI-designated cancer center implemented pathways in July 2018 to reduce care variation and decrease costs. Methods: We reviewed costs related to pathway utilization over a two year period, analyzing differences in total annual drug cost for patients in three categories: On-Pathway (aligned with pathway recommendation), Off-Pathway (not aligned with recommendation), and No Pathway (not used). Per Member Per Month (PMPM) costs were calculated and a weighted average applied to account for changes in annual drug costs. Results: PMPM drug costs decreased -8% in year 1 (FY19) and -4% in year 2 (FY20) when pathways were used (On- and Off-Pathway). When pathways were followed (On-Pathway) in making treatment decisions, the drug costs were 11% lower than when pathways were not used. The annual impact on drug costs when pathways were used amounted to $2.45 million in year 1 and $1.77 million in year 2 (Table). Conclusions: Pathway use reduced drug costs, a significant variable in oncology value-based care models. This finding highlights the value of clinical decision support tools in reducing care variability, a known contributor to health care costs, in making treatment decisions. Further assessment is needed to determine if these results are similar at other cancer centers to fully realize the impact of pathways on drug costs.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals A Narrative Review of Clinical Decision Support for Inpatient Clinical Pharmacists

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (02) ◽  
pp. 199-207
Author(s):  
Liang Yan ◽  
Thomas Reese ◽  
Scott D. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Clinical Pharmacists ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Objective Increasingly, pharmacists provide team-based care that impacts patient care; however, the extent of recent clinical decision support (CDS), targeted to support the evolving roles of pharmacists, is unknown. Our objective was to evaluate the literature to understand the impact of clinical pharmacists using CDS. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central for randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized trials, and quasi-experimental studies which evaluated CDS tools that were developed for inpatient pharmacists as a target user. The primary outcome of our analysis was the impact of CDS on patient safety, quality use of medication, and quality of care. Outcomes were scored as positive, negative, or neutral. The secondary outcome was the proportion of CDS developed for tasks other than medication order verification. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results Of 4,365 potentially relevant articles, 15 were included. Five studies were randomized controlled trials. All included studies were rated as good quality. Of the studies evaluating inpatient pharmacists using a CDS tool, four showed significantly improved quality use of medications, four showed significantly improved patient safety, and three showed significantly improved quality of care. Six studies (40%) supported expanded roles of clinical pharmacists. Conclusion These results suggest that CDS can support clinical inpatient pharmacists in preventing medication errors and optimizing pharmacotherapy. Moreover, an increasing number of CDS tools have been developed for pharmacists' roles outside of order verification, whereby further supporting and establishing pharmacists as leaders in safe and effective pharmacotherapy.

scholarly journals Comparison of an oncology clinical decision-support system’s recommendations with actual treatment decisions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suthida Suwanvecho ◽  
Harit Suwanrusme ◽  
Tanawat Jirakulaporn ◽  
Surasit Issarachai ◽  
Nimit Taechakraichana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Treatment Decisions ◽  
Therapeutic Options ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rectal Cancers

Abstract Objective IBM(R) Watson for Oncology (WfO) is a clinical decision-support system (CDSS) that provides evidence-informed therapeutic options to cancer-treating clinicians. A panel of experienced oncologists compared CDSS treatment options to treatment decisions made by clinicians to characterize the quality of CDSS therapeutic options and decisions made in practice. Methods This study included patients treated between 1/2017 and 7/2018 for breast, colon, lung, and rectal cancers at Bumrungrad International Hospital (BIH), Thailand. Treatments selected by clinicians were paired with therapeutic options presented by the CDSS and coded to mask the origin of options presented. The panel rated the acceptability of each treatment in the pair by consensus, with acceptability defined as compliant with BIH’s institutional practices. Descriptive statistics characterized the study population and treatment-decision evaluations by cancer type and stage. Results Nearly 60% (187) of 313 treatment pairs for breast, lung, colon, and rectal cancers were identical or equally acceptable, with 70% (219) of WfO therapeutic options identical to, or acceptable alternatives to, BIH therapy. In 30% of cases (94), 1 or both treatment options were rated as unacceptable. Of 32 cases where both WfO and BIH options were acceptable, WfO was preferred in 18 cases and BIH in 14 cases. Colorectal cancers exhibited the highest proportion of identical or equally acceptable treatments; stage IV cancers demonstrated the lowest. Conclusion This study demonstrates that a system designed in the US to support, rather than replace, cancer-treating clinicians provides therapeutic options which are generally consistent with recommendations from oncologists outside the US.

scholarly journals Clinical Decision Support for Ovarian Carcinoma Subtype Classification: A Pilot Observer Study With Pathology Trainees

2019 ◽  
Vol 144 (7) ◽  
pp. 869-877 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marios A. Gavrielides ◽  
Meghan Miller ◽  
Ian S. Hagemann ◽  
Heba Abdelal ◽  
Zahra Alipour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Ovarian Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Subspecialty Training ◽  
Reference Standard ◽  
Observer Study ◽  
Subtype Classification ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Whole Slide Images

Context.— Clinical decision support (CDS) systems could assist less experienced pathologists with certain diagnostic tasks for which subspecialty training or extensive experience is typically needed. The effect of decision support on pathologist performance for such diagnostic tasks has not been examined. Objective.— To examine the impact of a CDS tool for the classification of ovarian carcinoma subtypes by pathology trainees in a pilot observer study using digital pathology. Design.— Histologic review on 90 whole slide images from 75 ovarian cancer patients was conducted by 6 pathology residents using: (1) unaided review of whole slide images, and (2) aided review, where in addition to whole slide images observers used a CDS tool that provided information about the presence of 8 histologic features important for subtype classification that were identified previously by an expert in gynecologic pathology. The reference standard of ovarian subtype consisted of majority consensus from a panel of 3 gynecologic pathology experts. Results.— Aided review improved pairwise concordance with the reference standard for 5 of 6 observers by 3.3% to 17.8% (for 2 observers, increase was statistically significant) and mean interobserver agreement by 9.2% (not statistically significant). Observers benefited the most when the CDS tool prompted them to look for missed histologic features that were definitive for a certain subtype. Observer performance varied widely across cases with unanimous and nonunanimous reference classification, supporting the need for balancing data sets in terms of case difficulty. Conclusions.— Findings showed the potential of CDS systems to close the knowledge gap between pathologists for complex diagnostic tasks.

scholarly journals The Changing Nature of Clinical Decision Support Systems: a Focus on Consumers, Genomics, Public Health and Decision Safety

2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (01) ◽  
pp. 84-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Y. S. Lau ◽  
G. Tsafnat ◽  
V. Sintchenko ◽  
F. Magrabi ◽  
E. Coiera
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Genetic Data ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Translational Bioinformatics ◽  
The Impact

Summary Objectives To review the recent research literature in clinical decision support systems (CDSS). Methods A review of recent literature was undertaken, focussing on CDSS evaluation, consumers and public health, the impact of translational bioinformatics on CDSS design, and CDSS safety. Results In recent years, researchers have concentrated much less on the development of decision technologies, and have focussed more on the impact of CDSS in the clinical world. Recent work highlights that traditional process measures of CDSS effectiveness, such as document relevance are poor proxy measures for decision outcomes. Measuring the dynamics of decision making, for example via decision velocity, may produce a more accurate picture of effectiveness. Another trend is the broadening of user base for CDSS beyond front line clinicians. Consumers are now a major focus for biomedical informatics, as are public health officials, tasked with detecting and managing disease outbreaks at a health system, rather than individual patient level. Bioinformatics is also changing the nature of CDSS. Apart from personalisation of therapy recommendations, translational bioinformatics is creating new challenges in the interpretation of the meaning of genetic data. Finally, there is much recent interest in the safety and effectiveness of computerised physicianorderentry (CPOE) systems, given that prescribing and administration errors are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Of note, there is still much controversy surrounding the contention that poorly designed, implemented or used CDSS may actually lead to harm. Conclusions CDSS research remains an active and evolving area of research, as CDSS penetrate more widely beyond their traditional domain into consumer decision support, and as decisions become more complex, for example by involving sequence level genetic data.

“Send & hold” clinical decision support rules improvement to reduce unnecessary testing of vitamins A, E, K, B1, B2, B3, B6 and C

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (7) ◽  
pp. 1063-1070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Rodriguez-Borja ◽  
Africa Corchon-Peyrallo ◽  
Esther Barba-Serrano ◽  
Celia Villalba Martínez ◽  
Arturo Carratala Calvo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Vitamin B1 ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Health Department ◽  
Leadership Role ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Vitamin B3 ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: We assessed the impact of several “send & hold” clinical decision support rules (CDSRs) within the electronical request system for vitamins A, E, K, B1, B2, B3, B6 and C for all outpatients at a large health department. Methods: When ordered through electronical request, providers (except for all our primary care physicians who worked as a non-intervention control group) were always asked to answer several compulsory questions regarding main indication, symptomatology, suspected diagnosis, vitamin active treatments, etc., for each vitamin test using a drop-down list format. After samples arrival, tests were later put on hold internally by our laboratory information system (LIS) until review for their appropriateness was made by two staff pathologists according to the provided answers and LIS records (i.e. “send & hold”). The number of tests for each analyte was compared between the 10-month period before and after CDSRs implementation in both groups. Results: After implementation, vitamins test volumes decreased by 40% for vitamin A, 29% for vitamin E, 42% for vitamin K, 37% for vitamin B1, 85% for vitamin B2, 68% for vitamin B3, 65% for vitamin B6 and 59% for vitamin C (all p values 0.03 or lower except for vitamin B3), whereas in control group, the majority increased or remained stable. In patients with rejected vitamins, no new requests and/or adverse clinical outcome comments due to this fact were identified. Conclusions: “Send & hold” CDSRs are a promising informatics tool that can support in utilization management and enhance the pathologist’s leadership role as tests specialist.

scholarly journals A Closer Look at the “Right” Format for Clinical Decision Support: Methods for Evaluating a Storyboard BestPractice Advisory

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 142
Author(s):  
Brian J. Douthit ◽  
R. Clayton Musser ◽  
Kay S. Lytle ◽  
Rachel L. Richesson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
System Level ◽  
Evaluation Methodology ◽  
Task Completion ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Alert Fatigue ◽  
The Impact

(1) Background: The five rights of clinical decision support (CDS) are a well-known framework for planning the nuances of CDS, but recent advancements have given us more options to modify the format of the alert. One-size-fits-all assessments fail to capture the nuance of different BestPractice Advisory (BPA) formats. To demonstrate a tailored evaluation methodology, we assessed a BPA after implementation of Storyboard for changes in alert fatigue, behavior influence, and task completion; (2) Methods: Data from 19 weeks before and after implementation were used to evaluate differences in each domain. Individual clinics were evaluated for task completion and compared for changes pre- and post-redesign; (3) Results: The change in format was correlated with an increase in alert fatigue, a decrease in erroneous free text answers, and worsened task completion at a system level. At a local level, however, 14% of clinics had improved task completion; (4) Conclusions: While the change in BPA format was correlated with decreased performance, the changes may have been driven primarily by the COVID-19 pandemic. The framework and metrics proposed can be used in future studies to assess the impact of new CDS formats. Although the changes in this study seemed undesirable in aggregate, some positive changes were observed at the level of individual clinics. Personalized implementations of CDS tools based on local need should be considered.

scholarly journals Clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics via a health system-wide research biobank: the University of Colorado experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 375-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L Aquilante ◽  
David P Kao ◽  
Katy E Trinkley ◽  
Chen-Tan Lin ◽  
Kristy R Crooks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Health System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Tool ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Clinical Implementation ◽  
Support Tool ◽  
University Of Colorado ◽  
The University ◽  
The Impact

In recent years, the genomics community has witnessed the growth of large research biobanks, which collect DNA samples for research purposes. Depending on how and where the samples are genotyped, biobanks also offer the potential opportunity to return actionable genomic results to the clinical setting. We developed a preemptive clinical pharmacogenomic implementation initiative via a health system-wide research biobank at the University of Colorado. Here, we describe how preemptive return of clinical pharmacogenomic results via a research biobank is feasible, particularly when coupled with strong institutional support to maximize the impact and efficiency of biobank resources, a multidisciplinary implementation team, automated clinical decision support tools, and proactive strategies to engage stakeholders early in the clinical decision support tool development process.

scholarly journals Contributions on Clinical Decision Support from the 2018 Literature

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (01) ◽  
pp. 135-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vassilis Koutkias ◽  
Jacques Bouaud ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Free Text

Objectives: To summarize recent research and select the best papers published in 2018 in the field of computerized clinical decision support for the Decision Support section of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) yearbook. Methods: A literature review was performed by searching two bibliographic databases for papers referring to clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). The aim was to identify a list of candidate best papers from the retrieved bibliographic records, which were then peer-reviewed by external reviewers. A consensus meeting of the IMIA editorial team finally selected the best papers on the basis of all reviews and the section editors' evaluation. Results: Among 1,148 retrieved articles, 15 best paper candidates were selected, the review of which resulted in the selection of four best papers. The first paper introduces a deep learning model for estimating short-term life expectancy (>3 months) of metastatic cancer patients by analyzing free-text clinical notes in electronic medical records, while maintaining the temporal visit sequence. The second paper takes note that CDSSs become routinely integrated in health information systems and compares statistical anomaly detection models to identify CDSS malfunctions which, if remain unnoticed, may have a negative impact on care delivery. The third paper fairly reports on lessons learnt from the development of an oncology CDSS using artificial intelligence techniques and from its assessment in a large US cancer center. The fourth paper implements a preference learning methodology for detecting inconsistencies in clinical practice guidelines and illustrates the applicability of the proposed methodology to antibiotherapy. Conclusions: Three of the four best papers rely on data-driven methods, and one builds on a knowledge-based approach. While there is currently a trend for data-driven decision support, the promising results of such approaches still need to be confirmed by the adoption of these systems and their routine use.

scholarly journals A Quality Improvement Initiative to Decrease Platelet Ordering Errors and a Proposed Model for Evaluating Clinical Decision Support Effectiveness

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (03) ◽  
pp. 505-512
Author(s):  
Julia Whitlow Yarahuan ◽  
Amy Billet ◽  
Jonathan D. Hron
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Platelet Transfusion ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Inpatient Service ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Order Set

Background and Objectives Clinical decision support (CDS) and computerized provider order entry have been shown to improve health care quality and safety, but may also generate previously unanticipated errors. We identified multiple CDS tools for platelet transfusion orders. In this study, we sought to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of those CDS tools while creating and testing a framework for future evaluation of other CDS tools. Methods Using a query of an enterprise data warehouse at a tertiary care pediatric hospital, we conducted a retrospective analysis to assess baseline use and performance of existing CDS for platelet transfusion orders. Our outcome measure was the percentage of platelet undertransfusion ordering errors. Errors were defined as platelet transfusion volumes ordered which were less than the amount recommended by the order set used. We then redesigned our CDS and measured the impact of our intervention prospectively using statistical process control methodology. Results We identified that 62% of all platelet transfusion orders were placed with one of two order sets (Inpatient Service 1 and Inpatient Service 2). The Inpatient Service 1 order set had a significantly higher occurrence of ordering errors (3.10% compared with 1.20%). After our interventions, platelet transfusion order error occurrence on Inpatient Service 1 decreased from 3.10 to 0.33%. Conclusion We successfully reduced platelet transfusion ordering errors by redesigning our CDS tools. We suggest that the use of collections of clinical data may help identify patterns in erroneous ordering, which could otherwise go undetected. We have created a framework which can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of other similar CDS tools.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document