Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26009977›Full record

Trial reportJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2016

Outcomes of clinical decision support (CDS) and correlates of CDS use for home care patients with high medication regimen complexity: a randomized trial.

Margaret V McDonald, Penny H Feldman, Yolanda Barrón-Vayá, Timothy R Peng, Sridevi Sridharan, Liliana E Pezzin

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors.

Margaret V McDonaldData Science and Strategic Analytic, VNS Outcomes Initiative, New York, NY, USA.
Penny H FeldmanData Science and Strategic Analytic, VNS Outcomes Initiative, New York, NY, USA.
Yolanda Barrón-VayáData Science and Strategic Analytic, VNS Outcomes Initiative, New York, NY, USA.
Timothy R PengData Science and Strategic Analytic, VNS Outcomes Initiative, New York, NY, USA.
Sridevi SridharanCenter for Home Care Policy and Research, Visiting Nurse Service of New York, New York, NY, USA.
Liliana E PezzinDepartment of Medicine and Health Policy Institute, Medical College of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.

Funding

Improving Medication Management Practices and Care Transitions through TechnologyR18HS017837 · AHRQ · VISITING NURSE SERVICE OF NEW YORK · PI FELDMAN, PENNY H. · 2008 to 2010
$1.2M
AHRQ HHS R18 HS017837
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE, AIMS AND

objectivesTo assess the outcomes of a clinical decision support (CDS) intervention designed for home care patients with high medication regimen complexity (MRC) and to examine correlates of CDS use.

methodThe CDS consisted of a computerized algorithm that identified high MRC patients, electronic alerts and a care management module. Nurses were randomized upon identification of an eligible patient. Full intention to treat and intervention group-only analyses were completed. Regression-adjusted outcomes were hospitalization, emergency department use and reduction in MRC.

resultsFive hundred nurses were randomized with 7919 of their patients. Approximately 20% of the intervention group was hospitalized versus 21% in the control group; 16.5% versus 16.7% had an emergency department visit; and 6% in each group dropped below the high MRC threshold. No statistically significant differences were found in the intention to treat analysis. Eighty-two percent of intervention nurses used the CDS but for only 42% of their patients. Among intervention patients, CDS use (vs. non-use) was associated with reduced MRC and hospitalization. CDS use was associated with various clinician and patient characteristics.

conclusionCDS use was limited, negating the impact of the intervention overall. Findings on correlates of CDS use and the relationship between CDS use and positive outcomes suggest that CDS use and outcomes could be enhanced by avoiding short patient lengths of stay, improving continuity of care, increasing reliance on salaried nurses and/or increasing per diem nurses' incentives to use CDS.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalHome Care ServicesOutcome Assessment, Health CarePolypharmacyAdultDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursesRisk Assessmentclinical decision supporthome health carehospitalization riskmedication regimen complexityMRCInurses

Identifiers

PMID26009977
PMCPMC5474750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.