Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33400683›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2021

Giving Your Electronic Health Record a Checkup After COVID-19: A Practical Framework for Reviewing Clinical Decision Support in Light of the Telemedicine Expansion.

Jonah Feldman, Adam Szerencsy, Devin Mann, Jonathan Austrian, Ulka Kothari, Hye Heo, Sam Barzideh, Maureen Hickey, Catherine Snapp, Rod Aminian and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A scoping review of rule-based clinical decision support malfunctions.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the management of chronic limb-threatening ischemia and wound care.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society · 2022
    Review
  5. 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

12 authors.

Jonah FeldmanMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5821-0946
Adam SzerencsyMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0066-4400
Devin MannMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2099-0852
Jonathan AustrianMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0016-4705
Ulka KothariMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0869-6052
Hye HeoMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6069-0523
Sam BarzidehMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3586-6122
Maureen HickeyMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0042-6549
Catherine SnappMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1623-9222
Rod AminianMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6671-0740
Lauren JonesMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1533-0040
Paul TestaMedical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1512-9638

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe transformation of health care during COVID-19, with the rapid expansion of telemedicine visits, presents new challenges to chronic care and preventive health providers. Clinical decision support (CDS) is critically important to chronic care providers, and CDS malfunction is common during times of change. It is essential to regularly reassess an organization's ambulatory CDS program to maintain care quality. This is especially true after an immense change, like the COVID-19 telemedicine expansion.

objectiveOur objective is to reassess the ambulatory CDS program at a large academic medical center in light of telemedicine's expansion in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsOur clinical informatics team devised a practical framework for an intrapandemic ambulatory CDS assessment focused on the impact of the telemedicine expansion. This assessment began with a quantitative analysis comparing CDS alert performance in the context of in-person and telemedicine visits. Board-certified physician informaticists then completed a formal workflow review of alerts with inferior performance in telemedicine visits. Informaticists then reported on themes and optimization opportunities through the existing CDS governance structure.

resultsOur assessment revealed that 10 of our top 40 alerts by volume were not firing as expected in telemedicine visits. In 3 of the top 5 alerts, providers were significantly less likely to take action in telemedicine when compared to office visits. Cumulatively, alerts in telemedicine encounters had an action taken rate of 5.3% (3257/64,938) compared to 8.3% (19,427/233,636) for office visits. Observations from a clinical informaticist workflow review included the following: (1) Telemedicine visits have different workflows than office visits. Some alerts developed for the office were not appearing at the optimal time in the telemedicine workflow. (2) Missing clinical data is a common reason for the decreased alert firing seen in telemedicine visits. (3) Remote patient monitoring and patient-reported clinical data entered through the portal could replace data collection usually completed in the office by a medical assistant or registered nurse.

conclusionsIn a large academic medical center at the pandemic epicenter, an intrapandemic ambulatory CDS assessment revealed clinically significant CDS malfunctions that highlight the importance of reassessing ambulatory CDS performance after the telemedicine expansion.

Indexed as

ambulatory careclinical decision supportCOVID-19EHRelectronic health recordframeworkimplementationtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID33400683
PMCPMC7842852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.