Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31910877›Full record

Trial reportImplementation science : IS2020

Computerized clinical decision support system for diabetes in primary care does not improve quality of care: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Annemie Heselmans, Nicolas Delvaux, Annouschka Laenen, Stijn Van de Velde, Dirk Ramaekers, Ilkka Kunnamo, Bert Aertgeerts

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldFull text readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01830569 (Feasibility and Impact of an Evidence-based Electronic Decision Support System on Diabetes Care in Family Medicine), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
12.5field-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.

NCT01830569 nacompletednot on this map

Feasibility and Impact of an Evidence-based Electronic Decision Support System on Diabetes Care in Family Medicine: a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorKU LeuvenRan2017 to 2019Enrolled45ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2ArmsThe EBMeDS system, Evidence Linker
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Annemie HeselmansDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33 blok j, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. Annemie.Heselmans@kuleuven.be.ORCID 0000-0002-1686-8168
Nicolas DelvauxDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33 blok j, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Annouschka LaenenDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33 blok j, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Stijn Van de VeldeCentre for Informed Health Choices, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 222, Skøyen, 0213, Oslo, Norway.
Dirk RamaekersLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35 blok d, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Ilkka KunnamoDuodecim, Scientific Society of Finnish Physicians, PO Box 874, Kaivokatu 10, 00101, Helsinki, Finland.
Bert AertgeertsDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33 blok j, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BEFinnish Medical Society Duodecim · FINorwegian Institute of Public Health · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe EBMeDS system is the computerized clinical decision support (CCDS) system of EBPNet, a national computerized point-of-care information service in Belgium. There is no clear evidence of more complex CCDS systems to manage chronic diseases in primary care practices (PCPs). The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of EBMeDS use in improving diabetes care.

methodsA cluster-randomized trial with before-and-after measurements was performed in Belgian PCPs over 1 year, from May 2017 to May 2018. We randomly assigned 51 practices to either the intervention group (IG), to receive the EBMeDS system, or to the control group (CG), to receive usual care. Primary and secondary outcomes were the 1-year pre- to post-implementation change in HbA1c, LDL cholesterol, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Composite patient and process scores were calculated. A process evaluation was added to the analysis. Results were analyzed at 6 and 12 months. Linear mixed models and logistic regression models based on generalized estimating equations were used where appropriate.

resultsOf the 51 PCPs that were enrolled and randomly assigned (26 PCPs in the CG and 25 in the IG), 29 practices (3815 patients) were analyzed in the study: 2464 patients in the CG and 1351 patients in the IG. No change differences existed between groups in primary or secondary outcomes. Change difference between CG and IG after 1-year follow-up was - 0.09 (95% CI - 0.18; 0.01, p-value = 0.06) for HbA1c; 1.76 (95% CI - 0.46; 3.98, p-value = 0.12) for LDL cholesterol; and 0.13 (95% CI - 0.91; 1.16, p-value = 0.81) and 0.12 (95% CI - 1.25;1.49, p-value = 0.86) for systolic and diastolic blood pressure respectively. The odds ratio of the IG versus the CG for the probability of no worsening and improvement was 1.09 (95% CI 0.73; 1.63, p-value = 0.67) for the process composite score and 0.74 (95% CI 0.49; 1.12, p-value = 0.16) for the composite patient score. All but one physician was satisfied with the EBMeDS system.

conclusionsThe CCDS system EBMeDS did not improve diabetes care in Belgian primary care. The lack of improvement was mainly caused by imperfections in the organizational context of Belgian primary care for chronic disease management and shortcomings in the system requirements for the correct use of the EBMeDS system (e.g., complete structured records). These shortcomings probably caused low-use rates of the system.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01830569, Registered 12 April 2013.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsAntihypertensive AgentsBelgiumBlood PressureChronic DiseaseDecision Support Systems, ClinicalDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2DyslipidemiasElectronic Health RecordsFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsHypertensionAntihypertensive AgentsGlycated HemoglobinHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsLipidsDecision support systems, clinicalDiabetes MellitusElectronic Health RecordsPrimary Health CareRandomized Controlled TrialReminder systems

Identifiers

PMID31910877
PMCPMC6947861
OpenAlexW2998933518

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
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.