Difference between revisions of "The Impact of a Decision Support Tool Linked to an Electronic Medical Record on Glycemic Control in People with Type 2 Diabetes"
| (7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The authors wanted to compare the glycemic control of patients with Type 2 Diabetes who were treated by physicians with access to | + | The authors wanted to compare the glycemic control of patients with Type 2 Diabetes who were treated by physicians with access to clinical decision support ([[CDS]]) and physicians without access to clinical decision support. |
=Aim= | =Aim= | ||
| − | To compare the outcomes of glycemic control and glycemic burden of patients with Type 2 diabetes treated by a general | + | To compare the outcomes of glycemic control and glycemic burden of patients with Type 2 diabetes treated by a general practitioner with access to clinical decision support as oppose to a practitioner with no access to clinical decision support.<ref name="The Impact of a Decision Support tool linked to a EMR on Glycemic Control for type 2 diabetics">The Impact of a Decision Support Tool Linked to an Electronic Medical Record on Glycemic Control in People with type 2 Diabetes.http://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezproxyhost.library.tmc.edu/pmc/articles/PMC3869133/ |
</ref> | </ref> | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
=Methods= | =Methods= | ||
| − | A total of 875 patients with type 2 Diabetes participated in this study for 84 months. A total of 342 patients were seen and managed by | + | A total of 875 patients with type 2 Diabetes participated in this study for 84 months. A total of 342 patients were seen and managed by six general practitioners who had access to clinical decision support and 533 patients were managed by five general practitioners with no clinical decision support. Follow up was conducted over a period of 84 months. The study wanted to look at the effects of the patients glycosylated hemoglobin level (HbA1c).The clinic used an electronic medical record that provided audit information on the process and results of care for all patients. The electronic medical record administrator support system included a provider reminder system and a patient reminder system that prompted administrative staff to contact patients to attend appointments and to have regular monitoring. There were also triggers for causing the decision support rule to be applied if the HbA1c was above 7.5% or absence of in the last 3 months. <ref name="The Impact of a Decision Support tool linked to a EMR on Glycemic Control for type 2 diabetics">The Impact of a Decision Support Tool Linked to an Electronic Medical Record on Glycemic Control in People with type 2 Diabetes.http://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezproxyhost.library.tmc.edu/pmc/articles/PMC3869133/ |
</ref> | </ref> | ||
=Results= | =Results= | ||
| − | The study showed no difference for the 1st year but the 2nd year there was a significant difference in glycemic control. During the course of the 7 years of follow up 92.1% in the decision support group and 78.2% of those not receiving decision support achieved a target level of HbA1c at least once. Patients treated by doctors using the decision system were more likely to have the complete care bundle of planned review of HbA1c, where appropriate adjustments and prescriptions of statins and dietetic and nurse educator inputs<ref name="The Impact of a Decision Support tool linked to a EMR on Glycemic Control for type 2 diabetics">The Impact of a Decision Support Tool Linked to an Electronic Medical Record on Glycemic Control in People with type 2 Diabetes.http://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezproxyhost.library.tmc.edu/pmc/articles/PMC3869133/ | + | The study showed no difference for the 1st year but in the 2nd year there was a significant difference in glycemic control. During the course of the 7 years of follow up 92.1% in the decision support group and 78.2% of those not receiving decision support achieved a target level of HbA1c at least once. Patients who were treated by doctors using the decision system were more likely to have the complete care bundle of planned review of HbA1c, where appropriate adjustments and prescriptions of statins and dietetic and nurse educator inputs were given.<ref name="The Impact of a Decision Support tool linked to a EMR on Glycemic Control for type 2 diabetics">The Impact of a Decision Support Tool Linked to an Electronic Medical Record on Glycemic Control in People with type 2 Diabetes.http://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezproxyhost.library.tmc.edu/pmc/articles/PMC3869133/ |
</ref> | </ref> | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
=Conclusion= | =Conclusion= | ||
| − | The authors concluded that the use of clinical decision support did help the physicians with their patients glycemic control. | + | The authors concluded that the use of clinical decision support did help the physicians with their patients glycemic control. The use of a decision support system linked to an electronic health record showed benefits in adherence to clinical care pathways and achieving significant reductions in HbA1c and glycemic burden with improvements in treatment targets rates. The changes in HbA1c showed marked differences in the grouped.<ref name="The Impact of a Decision Support tool linked to a EMR on Glycemic Control for type 2 diabetics">The Impact of a Decision Support Tool Linked to an Electronic Medical Record on Glycemic Control in People with type 2 Diabetes.http://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezproxyhost.library.tmc.edu/pmc/articles/PMC3869133/ |
</ref> | </ref> | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| + | [[Category:Reviews]] | ||
| + | [[Category:CDS]] | ||
Latest revision as of 16:09, 3 March 2015
The authors wanted to compare the glycemic control of patients with Type 2 Diabetes who were treated by physicians with access to clinical decision support (CDS) and physicians without access to clinical decision support.
Contents
Aim
To compare the outcomes of glycemic control and glycemic burden of patients with Type 2 diabetes treated by a general practitioner with access to clinical decision support as oppose to a practitioner with no access to clinical decision support.[1]
Methods
A total of 875 patients with type 2 Diabetes participated in this study for 84 months. A total of 342 patients were seen and managed by six general practitioners who had access to clinical decision support and 533 patients were managed by five general practitioners with no clinical decision support. Follow up was conducted over a period of 84 months. The study wanted to look at the effects of the patients glycosylated hemoglobin level (HbA1c).The clinic used an electronic medical record that provided audit information on the process and results of care for all patients. The electronic medical record administrator support system included a provider reminder system and a patient reminder system that prompted administrative staff to contact patients to attend appointments and to have regular monitoring. There were also triggers for causing the decision support rule to be applied if the HbA1c was above 7.5% or absence of in the last 3 months. [1]
Results
The study showed no difference for the 1st year but in the 2nd year there was a significant difference in glycemic control. During the course of the 7 years of follow up 92.1% in the decision support group and 78.2% of those not receiving decision support achieved a target level of HbA1c at least once. Patients who were treated by doctors using the decision system were more likely to have the complete care bundle of planned review of HbA1c, where appropriate adjustments and prescriptions of statins and dietetic and nurse educator inputs were given.[1]
Conclusion
The authors concluded that the use of clinical decision support did help the physicians with their patients glycemic control. The use of a decision support system linked to an electronic health record showed benefits in adherence to clinical care pathways and achieving significant reductions in HbA1c and glycemic burden with improvements in treatment targets rates. The changes in HbA1c showed marked differences in the grouped.[1]
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 The Impact of a Decision Support Tool Linked to an Electronic Medical Record on Glycemic Control in People with type 2 Diabetes.http://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezproxyhost.library.tmc.edu/pmc/articles/PMC3869133/
