Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27530457›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2017

A systematic review of near real-time and point-of-care clinical decision support in anesthesia information management systems.

Allan F Simpao, Jonathan M Tan, Arul M Lingappan, Jorge A Gálvez, Sherry E Morgan, Michael A Krall

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
13.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Allan F SimpaoDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3401 Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA, 19104-4399, USA. simpaoa@email.chop.edu.
Jonathan M TanDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3401 Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA, 19104-4399, USA.
Arul M LingappanDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3401 Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA, 19104-4399, USA.
Jorge A GálvezDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3401 Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA, 19104-4399, USA.
Sherry E MorganUniversity of Pennsylvania Biomedical Library, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3610 Hamilton Walk, Philadelphia, PA, 19104-6060, USA.
Michael A KrallThe Permanente Federation and the Oregon Health and Science University, 10040 SW Balmer Circle, Portland, OR, 97219, USA.
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia · USOregon Health & Science University · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) are sophisticated hardware and software technology solutions that can provide electronic feedback to anesthesia providers. This feedback can be tailored to provide clinical decision support (CDS) to aid clinicians with patient care processes, documentation compliance, and resource utilization. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed articles on near real-time and point-of-care CDS within AIMS using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. Studies were identified by searches of the electronic databases Medline and EMBASE. Two reviewers screened studies based on title, abstract, and full text. Studies that were similar in intervention and desired outcome were grouped into CDS categories. Three reviewers graded the evidence within each category. The final analysis included 25 articles on CDS as implemented within AIMS. CDS categories included perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, post-operative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, vital sign monitors and alarms, glucose management, blood pressure management, ventilator management, clinical documentation, and resource utilization. Of these categories, the reviewers graded perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis and clinical documentation as having strong evidence per the peer reviewed literature. There is strong evidence for the inclusion of near real-time and point-of-care CDS in AIMS to enhance compliance with perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis and clinical documentation. Additional research is needed in many other areas of AIMS-based CDS.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsAnesthesia, DentalAnesthesiologyAntibiotic ProphylaxisBlood GlucoseDecision Support Systems, ClinicalDocumentationHumansInformation ManagementMonitoring, IntraoperativeNauseaPostoperative ComplicationsSoftwareVital SignsBlood GlucoseClinical decision support systemsComputerized medical records systemsIntegrated advanced information management systems

Identifiers

PMID27530457
OpenAlexW2283522127

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.