ArticleJoint Commission journal on quality and patient safety2023
Improving Judicious Use of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia Testing Through Electronic Health Record-Based Intervention.
Article in Joint Commission journal on quality and patient safety, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHeparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an immune-mediated drug reaction that can cause thromboembolism in the setting of thrombocytopenia. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-based assay to screen for HIT antibodies (HAb) is available but has relatively low specificity and a correspondingly high false positive rate. The 4Ts score has been validated to determine the pretest probability of HIT. The authors hypothesized that an electronic health record (EHR)-based clinical decision support (CDS) tool incorporating the 4Ts score would reduce the volume of HAb orders.
methodsAfter implementing a CDS tool into the EHR, the researchers retrospectively evaluated the impact from November 2019 to October 2021, compared to a preintervention period (January to October 2019). The primary outcome was average tests per month. Secondary outcomes included rates of tests ordered per total inpatient encounters and proportion of HAb sent despite low 4Ts score in the postintervention study period.
resultsOf 1,833 HAb sent during the study period, 1,217 occurred in the postintervention period. In the postintervention period compared with the preintervention period, the average orders per month was 50.5 (standard deviation [SD] 9.7) vs. 61.6 (SD 7.2) (p = 0.003), and the order incidence rate was 8.0 per 1,000 patient encounters postintervention vs. 9.2 per 1,000 patient encounters preintervention (rate ratio [RR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.96, p = 0.002). Postintervention, 252 (20.7%) had a 4Ts score calculated as low probability, 759 (62.4%) as intermediate probability, and 131 (10.8%) as high probability, and 75 had no associated 4Ts score.
conclusionImplementation of a simple CDS tool reduced the rate of HAb orders, reducing unnecessary HAb testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.