scholarly journals Reducing Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions for Older Patients Using Computerized Decision Support Tools: Systematic Review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luís Monteiro ◽  
Tiago Maricoto ◽  
Isabel Solha ◽  
Inês Ribeiro-Vaz ◽  
Carlos Martins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Potentially Inappropriate Medications ◽  
Decision Support Tools ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Support Tools ◽  
Inappropriate Medications ◽  
Inappropriate Prescriptions

BACKGROUND Older adults are more vulnerable to polypharmacy and prescriptions of potentially inappropriate medications. There are several ways to address polypharmacy to prevent its occurrence. We focused on computerized decision support tools. OBJECTIVE The available literature was reviewed to understand whether computerized decision support tools reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions or potentially inappropriate medications in older adult patients and affect health outcomes. METHODS Our systematic review was conducted by searching the literature in the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for interventional studies published through February 2018 to assess the impact of computerized decision support tools on potentially inappropriate medications and potentially inappropriate prescriptions in people aged 65 years and older. RESULTS A total of 3756 articles were identified, and 16 were included. More than half (n=10) of the studies were randomized controlled trials, one was a crossover study, and five were pre-post intervention studies. A total of 266,562 participants were included; of those, 233,144 participants were included and assessed in randomized controlled trials. Intervention designs had several different features. Computerized decision support tools consistently reduced the number of potentially inappropriate prescriptions started and mean number of potentially inappropriate prescriptions per patient. Computerized decision support tools also increased potentially inappropriate prescriptions discontinuation and drug appropriateness. However, in several studies, statistical significance was not achieved. A meta-analysis was not possible due to the significant heterogeneity among the systems used and the definitions of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Computerized decision support tools may reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions and potentially inappropriate medications. More randomized controlled trials assessing the impact of computerized decision support tools that could be used both in primary and secondary health care are needed to evaluate the use of medication targets defined by the Beers or STOPP (Screening Tool of Older People’s Prescriptions) criteria, adverse drug reactions, quality of life measurements, patient satisfaction, and professional satisfaction with a reasonable follow-up, which could clarify the clinical usefulness of these tools. CLINICALTRIAL International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42017067021; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017067021

scholarly journals Reducing Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions for Older Patients Using Computerized Decision Support Tools: Systematic Review

10.2196/15385 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. e15385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luís Monteiro ◽  
Tiago Maricoto ◽  
Isabel Solha ◽  
Inês Ribeiro-Vaz ◽  
Carlos Martins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Potentially Inappropriate Medications ◽  
Decision Support Tools ◽  
Computerized Decision Support ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Support Tools ◽  
Inappropriate Medications ◽  
Inappropriate Prescriptions

Background Older adults are more vulnerable to polypharmacy and prescriptions of potentially inappropriate medications. There are several ways to address polypharmacy to prevent its occurrence. We focused on computerized decision support tools. Objective The available literature was reviewed to understand whether computerized decision support tools reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions or potentially inappropriate medications in older adult patients and affect health outcomes. Methods Our systematic review was conducted by searching the literature in the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for interventional studies published through February 2018 to assess the impact of computerized decision support tools on potentially inappropriate medications and potentially inappropriate prescriptions in people aged 65 years and older. Results A total of 3756 articles were identified, and 16 were included. More than half (n=10) of the studies were randomized controlled trials, one was a crossover study, and five were pre-post intervention studies. A total of 266,562 participants were included; of those, 233,144 participants were included and assessed in randomized controlled trials. Intervention designs had several different features. Computerized decision support tools consistently reduced the number of potentially inappropriate prescriptions started and mean number of potentially inappropriate prescriptions per patient. Computerized decision support tools also increased potentially inappropriate prescriptions discontinuation and drug appropriateness. However, in several studies, statistical significance was not achieved. A meta-analysis was not possible due to the significant heterogeneity among the systems used and the definitions of outcomes. Conclusions Computerized decision support tools may reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions and potentially inappropriate medications. More randomized controlled trials assessing the impact of computerized decision support tools that could be used both in primary and secondary health care are needed to evaluate the use of medication targets defined by the Beers or STOPP (Screening Tool of Older People’s Prescriptions) criteria, adverse drug reactions, quality of life measurements, patient satisfaction, and professional satisfaction with a reasonable follow-up, which could clarify the clinical usefulness of these tools. Trial Registration International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42017067021; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017067021

scholarly journals A/B testing using rapid randomized controlled trials to optimize clinical decision support (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devin Mann ◽  
Adam Szerencsy ◽  
Leora Horwitz ◽  
Simon Jones ◽  
Masha Kuznetsova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Alert Fatigue ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND Clinical decision support (CDS) is a valuable feature of electronic health records (EHRs) designed to improve quality and safety. However, due to the complexities of system design and inconsistent results, CDS tools may inadvertently increase alert fatigue and contribute to physician burnout. A/B testing, or rapid-cycle randomized tests, is a useful method that can be applied to the EHR in order to understand and iteratively improve design choices embedded within CDS tools. OBJECTIVE This paper describes how rapid randomized controlled trials (RCTs) embedded within EHRs can be used to quickly ascertain the superiority of potential CDS tools to improve their usability, reduce alert fatigue and promote quality of care. METHODS A multi-step process combining tools from user-centered design, A/B testing and implementation science is used to understand, ideate, prototype, test, analyze and improve each candidate CDS. CDS engagement metrics (alert views, ignores, orders) are used to evaluate which CDS version is superior. RESULTS Two experiments are highlighted to demonstrate the impact of the process. First, after multiple rounds of usability testing, a revised CDS influenza alert was tested against usual care in a rapid RCT. The new alert text resulted in minimal impact but the failure triggered another round of testing that identified key issues and led to a 70% reduction in alert volume in the next round. In the second experiment, the process was used to test three versions (financial, quality, regulatory) of text supporting tobacco cessation alerts as well as three supporting images. Three rounds of RCTs showed that the financial framing was 5-10% more effective than the other two but that adding images did not have a positive impact. CONCLUSIONS These data support the potential for this new process to rapidly develop, deploy and improve CDS within an EHR. This approach may be an important tool for improving the impact and experience of CDS. CLINICALTRIAL Our flu alert trial was registered in January 2018 with ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT03415425. Our tobacco alert trial was registered in October 2018 with ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT03714191.

scholarly journals Digital Self-Management Support Tools in the Care Plan of Patients With Cancer: Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

10.2196/20861 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. e20861
Author(s):  
Danielle JM Adriaans ◽  
Angelique TM Dierick-van Daele ◽  
Marc Johannes Hubertus Maria van Bakel ◽  
Grard AP Nieuwenhuijzen ◽  
Joep AW Teijink ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Physical Activity ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Management Support ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Support Tools

Background Digital self-management support tools (DSMSTs)—electronic devices or monitoring systems to monitor or improve health status—have become increasingly important in cancer care. Objective The aim of this review is to analyze published randomized clinical trials to assess the effectiveness of DSMSTs on physical and psychosocial symptoms or other supportive care needs in adult patients with cancer. Methods Five databases were searched from January 2013 to January 2020. English or Dutch language randomized controlled trials comparing DSMSTs with no intervention, usual care, alternative interventions, or a combination and including patients aged ≥18 years with pathologically proven cancer in the active treatment or survivorship phases were included. The results were summarized qualitatively. Results A total of 19 publications describing 3 types of DSMSTs were included. Although the content, duration, and frequency of interventions varied considerably across studies, the commonly used elements included an assessment component, tailored symptom self-management support, an information section, a communication section, and a diary. Significant positive effects were observed on quality of life in 6 (out of 10) studies, on anxiety in 1 (out of 5) study and depression in 2 (out of 8) studies, on symptom distress in 5 (out of 7) studies, on physical activity in 4 (out of 6) studies, on dietary behavior in 1 (out of 4) study, and on fatigue in 2 (out of 5) studies. Moreover, significant negative effects were observed on anxiety in 1 (out of 5) study and depression in 1 (out of 8) study. Most interventions were web-based interventions; 2 studies used mobile apps, and 1 study used a game as a DSMST. The overall quality of the studies was found to be good, with 13 out of 19 studies classified as high quality. Conclusions This review suggests that DSMSTs have a beneficial effect on the quality of life. For effects on other patient outcomes (eg, anxiety and depression, symptom distress, physical activity, dietary behavior, and fatigue), the evidence is inconsistent and limited or no effect is suggested. Future research should focus on specific tumor types, study different types of interventions separately, and assess the effects of specific interventions at different stages of disease progression.

scholarly journals Digital Self-Management Support Tools in the Care Plan of Patients With Cancer: Review of Randomized Controlled Trials (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle JM Adriaans ◽  
Angelique TM Dierick-van Daele ◽  
Marc Johannes Hubertus Maria van Bakel ◽  
Grard AP Nieuwenhuijzen ◽  
Joep AW Teijink ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Physical Activity ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Management Support ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Support Tools

BACKGROUND Digital self-management support tools (DSMSTs)—electronic devices or monitoring systems to monitor or improve health status—have become increasingly important in cancer care. OBJECTIVE The aim of this review is to analyze published randomized clinical trials to assess the effectiveness of DSMSTs on physical and psychosocial symptoms or other supportive care needs in adult patients with cancer. METHODS Five databases were searched from January 2013 to January 2020. English or Dutch language randomized controlled trials comparing DSMSTs with no intervention, usual care, alternative interventions, or a combination and including patients aged ≥18 years with pathologically proven cancer in the active treatment or survivorship phases were included. The results were summarized qualitatively. RESULTS A total of 19 publications describing 3 types of DSMSTs were included. Although the content, duration, and frequency of interventions varied considerably across studies, the commonly used elements included an assessment component, tailored symptom self-management support, an information section, a communication section, and a diary. Significant positive effects were observed on quality of life in 6 (out of 10) studies, on anxiety in 1 (out of 5) study and depression in 2 (out of 8) studies, on symptom distress in 5 (out of 7) studies, on physical activity in 4 (out of 6) studies, on dietary behavior in 1 (out of 4) study, and on fatigue in 2 (out of 5) studies. Moreover, significant negative effects were observed on anxiety in 1 (out of 5) study and depression in 1 (out of 8) study. Most interventions were web-based interventions; 2 studies used mobile apps, and 1 study used a game as a DSMST. The overall quality of the studies was found to be good, with 13 out of 19 studies classified as <i>high quality</i>. CONCLUSIONS This review suggests that DSMSTs have a beneficial effect on the quality of life. For effects on other patient outcomes (eg, anxiety and depression, symptom distress, physical activity, dietary behavior, and fatigue), the evidence is inconsistent and limited or no effect is suggested. Future research should focus on specific tumor types, study different types of interventions separately, and assess the effects of specific interventions at different stages of disease progression.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document