Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19183464›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2009

Do decision support systems influence variation in prescription?

Judith D de Jong, Peter P Groenewegen, Peter Spreeuwenberg, Gert P Westert, Dinny H de Bakker

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Influences on the start, selection and duration of treatment with antibiotics in long-term care facilities.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2017
    Article
  6. Is Customization in Antidepressant Prescribing Associated with Acute-Phase Treatment Adherence?Journal of pharmaceutical health services research : an official journal of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain · 2012
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Judith D de JongNIVEL-Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, PO Box 1568, 3500 BN Utrecht, the Netherlands. j.dejong@nivel.nl
Peter P Groenewegen
Peter Spreeuwenberg
Gert P Westert
Dinny H de Bakker

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranslating scientific evidence into daily practice is problematic. All kinds of intervention strategies, using educational and/or directive strategies, aimed at modifying behavior, have evolved, but have been found only partially successful. In this article the focus is on (computerized) decision support systems (DSSs). DSSs intervene in physicians' daily routine, as opposed to interventions that aim at influencing knowledge in order to change behavior. We examined whether general practitioners (GPs) are prescribing in accordance with the advice given by the DSS and whether there is less variation in prescription when the DSS is used.

methodsData were used from the Second Dutch National Survey of General Practice (DNSGP2), collected in 2001. A total of 82 diagnoses, 749811 contacts, 133 physicians, and 85 practices was included in the analyses. GPs using the DSS daily were compared to GPs who do not use the DSS. Multilevel analyses were used to analyse the data. Two outcome measures were chosen: whether prescription was in accordance with the advice of the DSS or not, and a measure of concentration, the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI).

resultsGPs who use the DSS daily prescribe more according to the advice given in the DSS than GPs who do not use the DSS. Contradictory to our expectation there was no significant difference between the HHIs for both groups: variation in prescription was comparable.

conclusionWe studied the use of a DSS for drug prescribing in general practice in the Netherlands. The DSS is based on guidelines developed by the Dutch College of General Practitioners and implemented in the Electronic Medical Systems of the GPs. GPs using the DSS more often prescribe in accordance with the advice given in the DSS compared to GPs not using the DSS. This finding, however, did not mean that variation is lower; variation is the same for GPs using and for GPs not using a DSS. Implications of the study are that DSSs can be used to implement guidelines, but that it should not be expected that variation is limited.

Indexed as

AdultAgedDecision Support Systems, ClinicalDrug PrescriptionsDrug Therapy, Computer-AssistedDrug Utilization ReviewFamily PracticeFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultilevel AnalysisNetherlandsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Quality Assurance, Health Care

Identifiers

PMID19183464
PMCPMC2662826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.