Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28292304›Full record

Trial reportImplementation science : IS2017

Design and implementation of electronic health record integrated clinical prediction rules (iCPR): a randomized trial in diverse primary care settings.

David A Feldstein, Rachel Hess, Thomas McGinn, Rebecca G Mishuris, Lauren McCullagh, Paul D Smith, Michael Flynn, Joseph Palmisano, Gheorghe Doros, Devin Mann

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02534987 (Integrated Clinical Prediction Rules), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT02534987 nacompletednot on this map

Integrated Clinical Prediction Rules: Bringing Evidence to Diverse Primary Care Settings

TypeinterventionalSponsorNYU Langone HealthRan2015 to 2018Enrolled33ConditionsStrep Throat, PneumoniaArmsiCPR2
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Engaging stakeholders in the adaptation of theImplementation science communications · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. THE HIGH COST OF LOW VALUE CARE.Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association · 2019
    Article
  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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

David A FeldsteinDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 2828 Marshall Court, Suite 100, Madison, WI, 53705, USA. df2@medicine.wisc.edu.
Rachel HessDivision of Health System Innovation and Research, University of Utah School of Medicine, Williams Building, 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA.
Thomas McGinnDepartment of Medicine, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, 300 Community Drive, Manhasset, NY, 11030, USA.
Rebecca G MishurisDepartment of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, 801 Massachusetts Avenue, Crosstown 2, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Lauren McCullaghDepartment of Medicine, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, 600 Community Drive, Suite 300, Manhasset, NY, 11030, USA.
Paul D SmithDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 1100 Delaplaine Court, Madison, WI, 53715, USA.
Michael FlynnWestridge Health Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, 3730 West 4700 South, West Valley City, UT, 84118, USA.
Joseph PalmisanoBoston University School of Public Health, Fuller Building M-900C, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Gheorghe DorosDepartment of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Crosstown Center-CT331, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Devin MannDepartment of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, 227 East 30th St. 7th floor, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
Boston University · USHofstra University · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USNew York University · USUniversity of Utah · USWest Health · US

Funding

Neuropathology CoreP30AG013846 · NIA · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI KOWALL, NEIL W. · 1996 to 2020
$29.1M
Integrated Clinical Prediction Rules: Bringing Evidence to Diverse Primary Care SettingsR01AI108680 · NIAID · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI FELDSTEIN, DAVID ALAN, MANN, DEVIN M · 2014 to 2024
$7.9M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI108680NIA NIH HHS P30 AG013846
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical prediction rules (CPRs) represent a method of determining individual patient risk to help providers make more accurate decisions at the point of care. Well-validated CPRs are underutilized but may decrease antibiotic overuse for acute respiratory infections. The integrated clinical prediction rules (iCPR) study builds on a previous single clinic study to integrate two CPRs into the electronic health record and assess their impact on practice. This article discusses study design and implementation of a multicenter cluster randomized control trial of the iCPR clinical decision support system, including the tool adaptation, usability testing, staff training, and implementation study to disseminate iCPR at multiple clinical sites across two health care systems.

methodsThe iCPR tool is based on two well-validated CPRs, one for strep pharyngitis and one for pneumonia. The iCPR tool uses the reason for visit to trigger a risk calculator. Provider completion of the risk calculator provides a risk score, which is linked to an order set. Order sets guide evidence-based care and include progress note documentation, tests, prescription medications, and patient instructions. The iCPR tool was refined based on interviews with providers, medical assistants, and clinic managers, and two rounds of usability testing. "Near live" usability testing with simulated patients was used to ensure that iCPR fit into providers' clinical workflows. Thirty-three Family Medicine and General Internal Medicine primary care clinics were recruited at two institutions. Clinics were randomized to academic detailing about strep pharyngitis and pneumonia diagnosis and treatment (control) or academic detailing plus use of the iCPR tool (intervention). The primary outcome is the difference in antibiotic prescribing rates between the intervention and control groups with secondary outcomes of difference in rapid strep and chest x-ray ordering. Use of the components of the iCPR will also be assessed. DISCUSSION: The iCPR study uses a strong user-centered design and builds on the previous initial study, to assess whether CPRs integrated in the electronic health record can change provider behavior and improve evidence-based care in a broad range of primary care clinics.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02534987 ).

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesAdolescentAdultAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsChildChild, PreschoolCluster AnalysisElectronic Health RecordsHumansMiddle AgedPractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareRespiratory Tract InfectionsYoung AdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsClinical decision supportElectronic health recordImplementation sciencePharyngitisPneumoniaRandomized controlled trialStreptococcal infections

Identifiers

PMID28292304
PMCPMC5351194
OpenAlexW2599531422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.