Difference between revisions of "Computerized clinical decision support systems for chronic disease management"
(Over half of the computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSS) improved the care processes of the patients chronic disease management and for some patients improved their health.) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
==Quality Assessment== | ==Quality Assessment== | ||
| − | Computerized clinical decision support systems are being used for all types of disease management. But does this really help the clinician in treating the patient and their medical condition? Are improvements being made to the patients outcomes related to their disease management? This and many other questions are being asked but there was not enough evidence for validation. | + | Computerized clinical decision support systems are being used for all types of disease management. But does this really help the clinician in treating the patient and their medical condition? Are improvements being made to the patients outcomes related to their disease management? This and many other questions are being asked but there was not enough evidence for validation. The authors conducted a decision-maker researcher partnership review searching different databases for eligible articles. The articles had to be published up to January 2010. The aurthors also included randomized controlled trials in their study. |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ==BACKGROUND== | |
| + | The use of computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) may improve chronic disease management, which requires recurrent visits to multiple health professionals, ongoing disease and treatment monitoring, and patient behavior modification. The objective of this review was to determine if CCDSSs improve the processes of chronic care (such as diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of disease) and associated patient outcomes (such as effects on biomarkers and clinical exacerbations). | ||
| + | ==METHODS== | ||
| + | We conducted a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid's EBM Reviews database, Inspec, and reference lists for potentially eligible articles published up to January 2010. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the use of CCDSSs to usual practice or non-CCDSS controls. Trials were eligible if at least one component of the CCDSS was designed to support chronic disease management. We considered studies 'positive' if they showed a statistically significant improvement in at least 50% of relevant outcomes. | ||
| + | ==RESULTS== | ||
| + | Of 55 included trials, 87% (n = 48) measured system impact on the process of care and 52% (n = 25) of those demonstrated statistically significant improvements. Sixty-five percent (36/55) of trials measured impact on, typically, non-major (surrogate) patient outcomes, and 31% (n = 11) of those demonstrated benefits. Factors of interest to decision makers, such as cost, user satisfaction, system interface and feature sets, unique design and deployment characteristics, and effects on user workflow were rarely investigated or reported. | ||
Revision as of 02:08, 10 February 2015
Quality Assessment
Computerized clinical decision support systems are being used for all types of disease management. But does this really help the clinician in treating the patient and their medical condition? Are improvements being made to the patients outcomes related to their disease management? This and many other questions are being asked but there was not enough evidence for validation. The authors conducted a decision-maker researcher partnership review searching different databases for eligible articles. The articles had to be published up to January 2010. The aurthors also included randomized controlled trials in their study.
BACKGROUND
The use of computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) may improve chronic disease management, which requires recurrent visits to multiple health professionals, ongoing disease and treatment monitoring, and patient behavior modification. The objective of this review was to determine if CCDSSs improve the processes of chronic care (such as diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of disease) and associated patient outcomes (such as effects on biomarkers and clinical exacerbations).
METHODS
We conducted a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid's EBM Reviews database, Inspec, and reference lists for potentially eligible articles published up to January 2010. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the use of CCDSSs to usual practice or non-CCDSS controls. Trials were eligible if at least one component of the CCDSS was designed to support chronic disease management. We considered studies 'positive' if they showed a statistically significant improvement in at least 50% of relevant outcomes.
RESULTS
Of 55 included trials, 87% (n = 48) measured system impact on the process of care and 52% (n = 25) of those demonstrated statistically significant improvements. Sixty-five percent (36/55) of trials measured impact on, typically, non-major (surrogate) patient outcomes, and 31% (n = 11) of those demonstrated benefits. Factors of interest to decision makers, such as cost, user satisfaction, system interface and feature sets, unique design and deployment characteristics, and effects on user workflow were rarely investigated or reported.
References
[1]
Cite error: <ref> tags exist, but no <references/> tag was found
