ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2023
Optimizing efficiency of a custom clinical decision support tool improves adult congenital heart disease care.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Quality of cardiovascular care in 2024.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study objective: Improve the efficiency of an inpatient clinical decision support tool (CDS) for patients with adult congenital heart disease (ACHD). Design: The efficiency of a CDS was evaluated across two time periods and compared. Setting: An academic, tertiary care center. Participants: ACHD patients roomed in an inpatient setting. Intervention: Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) methods were applied starting in 2021 and included refinement of diagnostic codes and the addition of department encounter codes. Main outcome measures: True positive and false positive CDS alerts. Results: Baseline data from 2017 had a median (IQR) of 38 (17) and 2019 baseline data had 65 (19) total alerts per month. Combining both baseline data years, the median true positive CDS alerts was 47.3 %. There were 71 (6) total alerts per month for the 2021-2022 time period and with ongoing PDSA cycles and optimization in the CDS the true positive alerts improved substantially resulting in a shifting of the median to 78.9 % within 9 months. Conclusion: CDS can efficiently notify providers when an ACHD patient is encountered. The use of ICD 10 codes alone to identify ACHD patients has limited accuracy with a high proportion of false positives. Ongoing revision of the CDS system methods is important to improving efficiency and minimizing provider alert fatigue.
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.