Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36964279›Full record

ArticleDrugs - real world outcomes2023

Clinical Decision Support Systems in Hospitalized Older Patients: An Exploratory Analysis in a Real-Life Clinical Setting.

Aimée E M J H Linkens, Dennis Kurstjens, N Anne Zwietering, Vanja Milosevic, Kim P G M Hurkens, Noémi van Nie, Bob P A van de Loo, P Hugo M van der Kuy, Bart Spaetgens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drugs - real world outcomes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Aimée E M J H LinkensDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Section Geriatric Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands. aimee.linkens@mumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9252-7656
Dennis KurstjensDepartment of Internal Medicine, Geriatric Medicine, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
N Anne ZwieteringDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Vanja MilosevicClinical Pharmacy, Elkerliek Hospital, Helmond, The Netherlands.
Kim P G M HurkensDepartment of Internal Medicine, Geriatric Medicine, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Noémi van NieDepartment of Research, Innovation and Funding, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Limburg, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Bob P A van de LooDigitalis Rx BV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
P Hugo M van der KuyDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Bart SpaetgensDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Section Geriatric Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInappropriate prescribing is associated with negative patient outcomes. In hospitalized patients, the use of Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSSs) may reduce inappropriate prescribing and thereby improve patient-related outcomes. However, recently published large clinical trials (OPERAM and SENATOR) have shown negative results on the use of CDSSs and patient outcomes and strikingly low acceptance of recommendations.

objectiveThe purpose of the present study was to investigate the use of a CDSS in a real-life clinical setting of hospitalized older patients. As such, we report on the real-life pattern of this in-hospital implemented CDSS, including (i) whether generated alerts were resolved; (ii) whether a recorded action by the pharmacist led to an improved number of resolved alerts; and (iii) the natural course of generated alerts, in particular of those in the non-intervention group; as these data are largely lacking in current studies.

methodsHospitalized patients, aged 60 years and older, admitted to Zuyderland Medical Centre, the Netherlands, in 2018 were included. The evaluation of the CDSS was investigated using a database used for standard care. Alongside demographic and clinical data, we also collected the total numbers of CDSS alerts, the number of alerts 'handled' by the pharmacist, those that resulted in an action by the pharmacist, and finally the outcome of the alerts at day 1 and day 3 after the alert was generated.

resultsA total of 3574 unique hospitalized patients, mean age 76.7 (SD 8.3) years and 53% female, were included. From these patients, 8073 alerts were generated, of which 7907 (97.9% of total) were handled by the pharmacist (day 1). In 51.6% of the alerts handled by the pharmacist, an action was initiated, resulting in 36.1% of the alerts resolved after day 1, compared with 27.3% if the pharmacist did not perform an action (p < 0.001). On day 3, in 52.6% of the alerts an action by the pharmacist was initiated, resulting in 62.4% resolved alerts, compared with 48.0% when no action was performed (p < 0.001). In the category renal function, the percentages differed significantly between an action versus no action of the pharmacist at day 1 and at day 3 (16.6% vs 10.6%, p < 0.001 [day 1]; 29.8% vs 19.4%, p < 0.001 [day 3]).

conclusionThis study demonstrates the pattern and natural course of clinical alerts of an in-hospital implemented CDSS in a real-life clinical setting of hospitalized older patients. Besides the already known beneficial effect of actions by pharmacists, we have also shown that many alerts become resolved without any specific intervention. As such, our study provides an important insight into the spontaneous course of resolved alerts, since these data are currently lacking in the literature.

Identifiers

PMID36964279
PMCPMC10491559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.