Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42316212›Full record

Trial reportImplementation science : IS2026

Patterns of CDSS adoption in primary care: a cluster analysis and predictive modelling study from a stepped wedge trial.

Jale Basten, Juliane Köberlein-Neu, Peter Ihle, Ingo Meyer, Nina Timmesfeld, eHealth COMPATH Study Group

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03430336 (Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Application of an Electronic Medication Management Support System in Patients With Polypharmacy in General Practice), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT03430336 nacompletednot on this map

Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Application of an Electronic Medication Management Support System in Patients With Polypharmacy in General Practice (AdAM).

TypeinterventionalSponsorBARMERRan2018 to 2021Enrolled12,000ConditionsPolypharmacyArmsCDSS provides drug-therapy relevant information, Modification of medication, Assessment of medication appropriateness, Medication plan, Guidance in medication process
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Jale BastenDepartment of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany. basten@amib.ruhr-uni-bochum.de.
Juliane Köberlein-NeuCenter for Health Economics and Health Services Research, Schumpeter School of Business and Economics, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany.
Peter IhlePMV Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Ingo MeyerPMV Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Nina TimmesfeldDepartment of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany.
eHealth COMPATH Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the potential of eHealth solutions to enhance medication management and patient safety, the integration of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) into primary care remains challenging for healthcare systems worldwide. In Germany, the Digital Healthcare Act created a legal framework to accelerate eHealth adoption, but implementation lags behind international standards. We reanalysed data from a completed cluster-randomised stepped wedge trial (SW-CRT) that implemented a CDSS for medication management in German primary care to identify and characterise distinct implementation patterns and their predictive factors.

methodsWe linked routine health insurance records, practice structural data, pseudonymised CDSS logbook entries, and cross-sectional postal survey data from general practitioners (GPs) participating in the SW-CRT (n = 736 practices). We used hierarchical cluster analysis (Ward's method) on five implementation outcomes to identify distinct adoption patterns. Random Forest models were developed to assess how well structural, patient-level, and attitudinal variables could classify practices into these patterns.

resultsOf 736 participating practices, 356 (48%) performed at least one medication review. Hierarchical cluster analysis of these practices based on five implementation outcomes identified three distinct adoption patterns. The remaining 380 practices that did not perform medication reviews constituted a fourth pattern. CDSS usage intensity did not align with cluster-specific intervention effect across patterns. The pattern with the lowest usage intensity and fidelity showed the largest cluster-specific intervention effect on the combined endpoint of hospitalisation and mortality. Practices in this pattern reported significantly higher change commitment, change efficacy, and cognitive participation. Random Forest models using structural variables alone showed limited discrimination (AUC 0.56-0.66). Including a binary indicator of GP survey participation improved discrimination (AUC 0.61-0.82).

conclusionsWithin this single trial context, higher CDSS usage intensity did not correspond to larger cluster-specific intervention effects, and adoption behaviour was heterogeneous across practices. Structural variables alone were insufficient to distinguish adoption patterns; differences were instead associated with attitudinal factors such as change commitment, change efficacy, and willingness to engage with the intervention. Because these attitudinal measures were collected after practices had reached intervention status, they cannot be interpreted as antecedents of adoption. These findings nonetheless underscore the value of assessing implementer engagement during implementation and of tailoring implementation strategies to distinct adoption patterns rather than pursuing uniform approaches.

trial registrationAdAM: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03430336), 6 February 2018; eHealth COMPATH: Open Science Framework (osf.io/gau5w), 29 December 2023.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalPractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareCluster AnalysisClustering AlgorithmsCross-Sectional StudiesDigital HealthGermanyHumansAdoption patternClinical decision support systemeHealth solutionHierarchical cluster analysisImplementer engagementMedication managementPredictive modellingPrimary careTailored implementation strategies

Identifiers

PMID42316212
PMCPMC13281615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.