scholarly journals Effects of Computerized Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes: Systematic Review

10.2196/17283 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. e17283
Author(s):  
Clemens Scott Kruse ◽  
Nolan Ehrbar
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Medical Outcomes ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Computerized Decision Support Systems

Background Computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) are software programs that support the decision making of practitioners and other staff. Other reviews have analyzed the relationship between CDSSs, practitioner performance, and patient outcomes. These reviews reported positive practitioner performance in over half the articles analyzed, but very little information was found for patient outcomes. Objective The purpose of this review was to analyze the relationship between CDSSs, practitioner performance, and patient medical outcomes. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were queried. Methods Articles were chosen based on year published (last 10 years), high quality, peer-reviewed sources, and discussion of the relationship between the use of CDSS as an intervention and links to practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers used an Excel spreadsheet (Microsoft Corporation) to collect information on the relationship between CDSSs and practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers also collected observations of participants, intervention, comparison with control group, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) along with those showing implicit bias. Articles were analyzed by multiple reviewers following the Kruse protocol for systematic reviews. Data were organized into multiple tables for analysis and reporting. Results Themes were identified for both practitioner performance (n=38) and medical outcomes (n=36). A total of 66% (25/38) of articles had occurrences of positive practitioner performance, 13% (5/38) found no difference in practitioner performance, and 21% (8/38) did not report or discuss practitioner performance. Zero articles reported negative practitioner performance. A total of 61% (22/36) of articles had occurrences of positive patient medical outcomes, 8% (3/36) found no statistically significant difference in medical outcomes between intervention and control groups, and 31% (11/36) did not report or discuss medical outcomes. Zero articles found negative patient medical outcomes attributed to using CDSSs. Conclusions Results of this review are commensurate with previous reviews with similar objectives, but unlike these reviews we found a high level of reporting of positive effects on patient medical outcomes.

scholarly journals Effects of Computerized Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes: Systematic Review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clemens Scott Kruse ◽  
Nolan Ehrbar
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Medical Outcomes ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Computerized Decision Support Systems

BACKGROUND Computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) are software programs that support the decision making of practitioners and other staff. Other reviews have analyzed the relationship between CDSSs, practitioner performance, and patient outcomes. These reviews reported positive practitioner performance in over half the articles analyzed, but very little information was found for patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this review was to analyze the relationship between CDSSs, practitioner performance, and patient medical outcomes. PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were queried. METHODS Articles were chosen based on year published (last 10 years), high quality, peer-reviewed sources, and discussion of the relationship between the use of CDSS as an intervention and links to practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers used an Excel spreadsheet (Microsoft Corporation) to collect information on the relationship between CDSSs and practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers also collected observations of participants, intervention, comparison with control group, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) along with those showing implicit bias. Articles were analyzed by multiple reviewers following the Kruse protocol for systematic reviews. Data were organized into multiple tables for analysis and reporting. RESULTS Themes were identified for both practitioner performance (n=38) and medical outcomes (n=36). A total of 66% (25/38) of articles had occurrences of positive practitioner performance, 13% (5/38) found no difference in practitioner performance, and 21% (8/38) did not report or discuss practitioner performance. Zero articles reported negative practitioner performance. A total of 61% (22/36) of articles had occurrences of positive patient medical outcomes, 8% (3/36) found no statistically significant difference in medical outcomes between intervention and control groups, and 31% (11/36) did not report or discuss medical outcomes. Zero articles found negative patient medical outcomes attributed to using CDSSs. CONCLUSIONS Results of this review are commensurate with previous reviews with similar objectives, but unlike these reviews we found a high level of reporting of positive effects on patient medical outcomes.

scholarly journals What are the Effects of Computerized Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clemens Scott Kruse ◽  
Nolan Ehrbar
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Medical Outcomes ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Computerized Decision Support Systems

Abstract Background Computerized decision support systems (CDSS) are software programs that support the decision making of practitioners and other staff. Other reviews have analyzed the relationship between CDSS, practitioner performance, and patient outcomes. These reviews reported positive practitioner performance in over half the articles analyzed, but very little information was found for patient outcomes. The purpose of this review was to analyze the relationship between CDSS, practitioner performance, and patient medical outcomes. PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases were queried.Methods 27 articles were chosen based on year published (last ten years), high quality source, and discussion of the relationship between the use of CDSS as an intervention and links to practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers used an Excel spreadsheet to collect information on the relationship between CDSS and practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Reviewers also collected observations of participants, intervention, comparison with control group, and outcomes (PICO) along with those showing implicit bias. Articles were analyzed by multiple reviewers following the Kruse Protocol for systematic reviews. Data were organized into multiple tables for analysis and reporting.Results Fourteen articles (52%) discussed positive practitioner performance, three articles (11%) found no difference in practitioner performance, ten articles (37%) did not discuss practitioner performance. Zero articles reported negative practitioner performance. Fifteen articles (56%) discussed positive patient medical outcomes, two articles (7%) found no statistically significant difference in medical outcomes between intervention and control groups, and ten articles (37%) did not discuss medical outcomes. Zero articles found negative patient medical outcomes.Conclusions Results of this review are commensurate with previous reviews with similar objectives, but unlike these reviews we found significant positive reporting of a positive effect on patient medical outcomes. Our findings support adoption of decision support systems.

scholarly journals Effects of computerized decision support systems on nursing performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 242-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Randell ◽  
Natasha Mitchell ◽  
Dawn Dowding ◽  
Nicky Cullum ◽  
Carl Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Interrupted Time Series ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Computerized Decision Support Systems

Objective: To examine the effect of computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) on nursing performance and patient outcomes. Method: Fifteen databases, including Medline and CINAHL, were searched up to May 2006 together with reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews. Randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies that assessed the effects of CDSS use by nurses in a clinical setting on measurable professional and/or patient outcomes were included. Results: Eight studies, three comparing nurses using CDSS with nurses not using CDSS and five comparing nurses using CDSS with other health professionals not using CDSS, were included. Risk of contamination was a concern in four studies. The effect of CDSS on nursing performance and patient outcomes was inconsistent. Conclusion: The introduction of CDSS may not necessarily lead to a positive outcome; further studies are needed in order to identify contexts in which CDSS use by nurses is most effective. CDSS are complex interventions and should be evaluated as such; future studies should explore the impact of the users and the protocol on which the CDSS is based, reporting details of both. Contamination is a significant issue when evaluating CDSS, so it is important that randomization is at the practitioner or the unit level. Future systematic reviews should focus on particular uses of CDSS.

scholarly journals Computerized Decision Support Systems for Nursing Homes: A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abir Abdellatif ◽  
Jacques Bouaud ◽  
Carmelo Lafuente-Lafuente ◽  
Joël Belmin ◽  
Brigitte Séroussi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Nursing Homes ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Computerized Decision Support Systems

COMPUTERIZED DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS ARE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL FOR THE STANDARDIZATION OF CRITICAL CARE

1995 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. A25
Author(s):  
Thomas East ◽  
Alan Morris ◽  
Jane Wallace ◽  
Donna Pope ◽  
Meg Franklin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Computerized Decision Support Systems

scholarly journals Effects of Computerized Decision Support Systems on Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Scoping Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reza Sheibani ◽  
Ehsan Nabovati ◽  
Mehdi Sheibani ◽  
Ameen Abu-Hanna ◽  
Alireza Heidari-Bakavoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Computerized Decision Support Systems

Computerized Decision Support Systems for Multimorbidity Care

2016 ◽  
pp. 486-494
Author(s):  
Audrey Grace ◽  
John O'Donoghue ◽  
Carolanne Mahony ◽  
Tony Heffernan ◽  
David Molony ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support Systems ◽  
Support Systems ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Computerized Decision Support Systems

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document