scholarly journals Communicating About Mortality in Health Decision Support: ‘What and Why and When, and How and Where and Who’

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Dowie ◽  
Mette Kjer Kaltoft ◽  
Vije Kumar Rajput

The Covid-19 pandemic has only accelerated the need and desire to deal more openly with mortality, because the effect on survival is central to the comprehensive assessment of harms and benefits needed to meet a ‘reasonable patient’ legal standard. Taking the view that this requirement is best met through a multi-criterial decision support tool, we offer our preferred answers to the questions of What should be communicated about mortality in the tool, and How, given preferred answers to Who for, Who by, Why, When, and Where. Summary measures, including unrestricted Life Expectancy and Restricted Mean Survival Time are found to be reductionist and relative, and not as easy to understand and communicate as often asserted. Full lifetime absolute survival curves should be presented, even if they cannot be ‘evidence-based’ beyond trial follow-up limits, along with equivalent measures for other criteria in the (necessarily) multi-criterial decision. A decision support tool should relieve the reasonable person of the resulting calculation burden.

CJEM ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (S1) ◽  
pp. S34-S35
Author(s):  
J. Andruchow ◽  
D. Grigat ◽  
A. McRae ◽  
G. Innes ◽  
E. Lang

Introduction/Innovation Concept: Utilization of CT imaging has increased dramatically over the past two decades, but has not necessarily improved patient outcomes. As healthcare spending grows unsustainably and evidence of harms from unnecessary testing accrues, there is pressure to improve imaging appropriateness. However, prior attempts to reduce unnecessary imaging using evidence-based guidelines have met with limited success, with common barriers cited including a lack of confidence in patient outcomes, medicolegal risk, and patient expectations. This project attempts to address these barriers through the development of an electronic clinical decision support (CDS) tool embedded in clinical practice. Methods: An interactive web-based point-of-care CDS tool was incorporated into computerized physician order entry software to provide real-time evidence-based guidance to emergency physicians for select clinical indications. For patients with mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI), decision support for the Canadian CT Head Rule pops up when a CT head is ordered. For patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE), the tool is triggered when a CT pulmonary angiogram is ordered and provides CDS for the Pulmonary Embolism Rule-out Criteria (PERC), Wells Score, age-adjusted D-dimer and CT imaging. To study the impact of the tool, all emergency physicians in the Calgary zone were randomized to receive voluntary decision support for either MTBI or PE. Curriculum, Tool, or Material: The tool uses a multifaceted approach to inform physician decision making, including visualization of risk and quantitative outcomes data and links to primary literature. The CDS tool simultaneously documents guideline compliance in the health record, generates printable patient education materials, and populates a REDCap™ database, enabling the creation of confidential physician report cards on CT utilization, appropriateness and diagnostic yield for both audit and feedback and research purposes. Preliminary data show that physicians are using the MTBI CDS approximately 30% of the time, and the PE CDS approximately 40% of the time. Evaluation of CDS impact on imaging utilization and appropriateness is ongoing. Conclusion: A voluntary web-based point-of-care decision support tool embedded in workflow has the potential to address many of the factors typically cited as barriers to use of evidence-based guidelines in practice. However, high rates of adherence to CDS will likely require physician incentives and appropriateness measures.


2016 ◽  
Vol 179 (21) ◽  
pp. 547-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. C. Gibbens ◽  
A. J. Frost ◽  
C. W. Houston ◽  
H. Lester ◽  
F. A. Gauntlett

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 24-30
Author(s):  
Alex R Campbell ◽  
David P Ingham ◽  
Michele F Shepherd ◽  
Joshua J Mueller ◽  
Timothy D Henry ◽  
...  

Background In the United States, over-testing and over-treatment are recognised causes of excess cost and patient harm. Healthcare value, defined as health outcomes achieved relative to the costs of care, has become a focus to improve the quality and affordability of healthcare. Aim To describe the rationale for, and development of a standardised clinical preoperative decision-support tool. Program description: An evidence-based, preoperative clinical decision tool was developed to guide preoperative testing and management of high-risk medications. Program evaluation: Patient data before and after implementation of the tool will be analysed to determine its effectiveness in reducing preoperative testing. Discussion Preoperative testing is an area that presents an opportunity to increase healthcare value and decrease healthcare spending. Guidelines are available to standardise preoperative assessment but their adoption and acceptance into practice has been slow. To systematise preoperative assessment within our healthcare system, we reviewed current published literature and guidelines and synthesised them into an electronic, evidence-based, decision-support tool. After distribution of the tool to clinicians in our healthcare system, we will assess its impact on healthcare value, costs and outcomes. We believe that an evidence-based preoperative tool, seamlessly and efficiently integrated into clinician workflow, can improve preoperative patient care.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. e035905
Author(s):  
Phillippa Harrison ◽  
Ewan Carr ◽  
Kimberley Goldsmith ◽  
Allan H Young ◽  
Mark Ashworth ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe Antidepressant Advisor Study is a feasibility trial of a computerised decision-support tool which uses an algorithm to provide antidepressant treatment guidance for general practitioners (GPs) in the UK primary care service. The tool is the first in the UK to implement national guidelines on antidepressant treatment guidance into a computerised decision-support tool.Methods and analysisThe study is a parallel group, cluster-randomised controlled feasibility trial where participants are blind to treatment allocation. GPs were assigned to two treatment arms: (1) treatment-as-usual (TAU) and (2) computerised decision-support tool to assist with antidepressant choices. The study will assess recruitment and lost to follow-up rates, GP satisfaction with the tool and impact on health service use. A meaningful long-term roll-out unit cost will be calculated for the tool, and service use data will be collected at baseline and follow-up to inform a full economic evaluation of a future trial.Ethics and disseminationThe study has received National Health Service ethical approval from the London—Camberwell St Giles Research Ethics Committee (ref: 17/LO/2074). The trial was pre-registered in the Clinical Trials.gov registry. The results of the study will be published in a pre-publication archive within 1 year of completion of the last follow-up assessment.Trial registration numberNCT03628027.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document