Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27530268›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2016

The Use of Evidence-Based, Problem-Oriented Templates as a Clinical Decision Support in an Inpatient Electronic Health Record System.

Raj Mehta, Nila S Radhakrishnan, Carrie D Warring, Ankur Jain, Jorge Fuentes, Angela Dolganiuc, Laura S Lourdes, John Busigin, Robert R Leverence

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  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

9 authors.

Raj MehtaRaj Mehta, M.D., Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100238, Gainesville, FL 32610, Phone: (352) 594-3589, Fax: (352) 265-0379, Email: rajking@ufl.edu.
Nila S Radhakrishnan
Carrie D Warring
Ankur Jain
Jorge Fuentes
Angela Dolganiuc
Laura S Lourdes
John Busigin
Robert R Leverence

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe integration of clinical decision support (CDS) in documentation practices remains limited due to obstacles in provider workflows and design restrictions in electronic health records (EHRs). The use of electronic problem-oriented templates (POTs) as a CDS has been previously discussed but not widely studied.

objectiveWe evaluated the voluntary use of evidence-based POTs as a CDS on documentation practices.

methodsThis was a randomized cohort (before and after) study of Hospitalist Attendings in an Academic Medical Center using EPIC EHRs. Primary Outcome measurement was note quality, assessed by the 9-item Physician Documentation Quality Instrument (PDQI-9). Secondary Outcome measurement was physician efficiency, assessed by the total charting time per note.

resultsUse of POTs increased the quality of note documentation [score 37.5 vs. 39.0, P = 0.0020]. The benefits of POTs scaled with use; the greatest improvement in note quality was found in notes using three or more POTs [score 40.2, P = 0.0262]. There was no significant difference in total charting time [30 minutes vs. 27 minutes, P = 0.42].

conclusionUse of evidence-based and problem-oriented templates is associated with improved note quality without significant change in total charting time. It can be used as an effective CDS during note documentation.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalElectronic Health RecordsEvidence-Based PracticeInpatientsHumansQuality ControlTime Factorsclinical decision supportclinical documentation and communicationsClinical information systemselectronic health records and systemsencounter notesinpatient care

Identifiers

PMID27530268
PMCPMC5052550

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.