[Use of a pharmaceutical decision support system in the valuation of hospital stays: Evaluation through 3 examples in collaboration with the department of medical information]. / Utilisation d'un système d'aide à la décision pharmaceutique dans la valorisation des séjours hospitaliers : évaluation à travers 3 exemples en collaboration avec le département de l'information médicale.

Pharmacy decision support systems (PDSS) help clinical pharmacists to prevent and detect adverse drug events. The coding of hospital stays by the department of medical information (DMI) requires expertise, as it determines hospital revenues and the epidemiological data transmitted via the French national hospital database. The aim was to study the interest and feasibility of using a PDSS, in collaboration with the DMI, to help with the coding of hospital stays. Over 5 months, three rules were implemented in the PDSS to detect gout, Parkinson's disease and oro-pharyngeal candidiasis. The PDSS alerts were analyzed by a pharmacy resident and then forwarded to the DMI, who analyzed the stays to see whether or not the coding for the disease corresponding to the alert was present. The absence of coding was evaluated and tracked, along with the resulting change in severity and valuation. Three hundred and ninety-nine alerts from the PDSS were analyzed and sent to the DMI, representing 211 stays and 309 uniform hospital standardized discharge abstract (UHSDA) in the fields of medicine, surgery and obstetrics. Two hundred and eight (67.3%) UHSDA did not have the coding corresponding to the alert. For the majority of these UHSDAs, apart from diagnostic precision, there was no impact on the valuation of stays. For 4 UHSDAs, the addition of the diagnosis code led to an increase in the value of the stay and the severity of the homogeneous patient groups. The total revaluation corresponding to this modification was €5416. The use of PDSS has helped in the precision of diagnosis coding and the valuation of stays. This result must be weighed against the time invested in analyzing alerts and associated coding. An improvement in disease detection and data processing is needed to be feasible in practice, given the more than 227,600 RSS performed per year at our facility.

A systematic review of the value of clinical decision support systems in the prescription of antidiabetic drugs.

INTRODUCTION: The management of chronic diabetes mellitus and its complications demands customized glycaemia control strategies. Polypharmacy is prevalent among people with diabetes and comorbidities, which increases the risk of adverse drug reactions. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) may constitute an innovative solution to these problems. The aim of our study was to conduct a systematic review assessing the value of CDSSs for the management of antidiabetic drugs (AD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched the scientific literature published between January 2010 and October 2023. The retrieved studies were categorized as non-specific or AD-specific. The studies' quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The review's results were reported in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty studies met our inclusion criteria. The majority of AD-specific studies were conducted more recently (2020-2023) compared to non-specific studies (2010-2015). This trend hints at growing interest in more specialized CDSSs tailored for prescriptions of ADs. The nine AD-specific studies focused on metformin and insulin and demonstrated positive impacts of the CDSSs on different outcomes, including the reduction in the proportion of inappropriate prescriptions of ADs and in hypoglycaemia events. The 11 nonspecific studies showed similar trends for metformin and insulin prescriptions, although the CDSSs' impacts were not significant. There was a predominance of metformin and insulin in the studied CDSSs and a lack of studies on ADs such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. CONCLUSION: The limited number of studies, especially randomized clinical trials, interested in evaluating the application of CDSS in the management of ADs underscores the need for further investigations. Our findings suggest the potential benefit of applying CDSSs to the prescription of ADs particularly in primary care settings and when targeting clinical pharmacists. Finally, establishing core outcome sets is crucial for ensuring consistent and standardized evaluation of these CDSSs.

Implementation of a clinical decision support system for the optimization of antidiabetic drug orders by pharmacists.

AIMS: The objective of the study was to describe the impact of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) on antidiabetic drug management by clinical pharmacists for hospitalized patients with T2DM. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, single-centre study in a teaching hospital, where clinical pharmacists analysed prescriptions and issued pharmacist interventions (PIs) through a computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system. A CDSS was integrated into the pharmacists' workflow in July 2019. We analysed PIs during 2 periods of interest: one before the introduction of the CDSS (from November 2018 to April 2019, PIs issued through the CPOE alone) and one afterwards (from November 2020 to April 2021, PIs issued through the CPOE and/or the CDSS). The study covered nondiabetology wards as endocrinology, diabetes and metabolism departments were not computerized at the time of the study. RESULTS: There were 203 PIs related to antidiabetic drugs in period 1 and 319 in period 2 (a 57.5% increase). Sixty-four of the 319 PIs were generated by the CDSS. Noncompliance/contraindication was the main problem identified by the CDSS (41 PIs, 68.4%), and 57.8% led to discontinuation of the drug. Most of the PIs issued through the CDSS corresponded to orders that had not been flagged up by clinical pharmacists using the CPOE. Conversely, most alerts about indications that were not being treated were detected by the clinical pharmacists using the CPOE and not by the CDSS. CONCLUSION: Use of CDSS by clinical pharmacists improved antidiabetic drug management for hospitalized patients with T2DM. The CDSS might add value to diabetes care in nondiabetology wards by decreasing the frequency of potentially inappropriate prescriptions and adverse drug reactions.

Comparison of the validity, perceived usefulness, and usability of I-MeDeSA and TEMAS, two tools to evaluate alert system usability.

OBJECTIVE: Two tools are currently available in the literature to evaluate the usability of medication alert systems, the instrument for evaluating human factors principles in medication-related decision support alerts (I-MeDeSA) and the tool for evaluating medication alerting systems (TEMAS). This study aimed to compare their convergent validity, perceived usability, usefulness, strengths, and weaknesses, as well as users' preferences. METHOD: To evaluate convergent validity, two experts mapped TEMAS' items against I-MeDeSA's items with respect to the usability dimensions they target. To assess perceived usability, usefulness, strengths, and weaknesses of both tools, staff with expertise in their medication alerting system were asked to use French versions of the TEMAS and I-MeDeSA. After the use of each tool, participants were asked to complete the System Usability Scale (SUS) and answer questions about the understandability and usefulness of each tool. Finally, participants were asked to name their preferred tool. Numeric scores were statistically compared. Free-text responses were analyzed using an inductive approach. RESULTS: Forty-five participants from 10 hospitals took part in the study. In terms of convergent validity, I-MeDeSA focuses more on the usability of the graphical user interface while TEMAS considers a wider range of usability principles. Both tools have a fair level of perceived usability (I-MeDeSA' SUS score = 61.85 and TEMAS' SUS score = 62.87), but results highlight that revisions are necessary to both tools to improve their usability. Participants found TEMAS more useful than I-MeDeSA (t = -3.63, p =.005) and had a clear preference for TEMAS to identify problems in formative evaluation (39 of 45; 0.867, p <.001) and to compare the usability of alert systems during the procurement process (36 of 45; 0.8, p <.001). CONCLUSIONS: The TEMAS is perceived as more useful and is preferred by participants. The I-MeDeSA seems more relevant for quick evaluations that focus on the graphical user interface. The TEMAS seems to be more suitable for in-depth usability evaluations of alert systems. Even if both tools are perceived to be equally usable, they suffer from wording, instructional, and organizational problems that hinder their use. The results of this study will be used to improve the design of I-MeDeSA and TEMAS.

Detection of Drug-Related Problems through a Clinical Decision Support System Used by a Clinical Pharmacy Team.

Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are intended to detect drug-related problems in real time and might be of value in healthcare institutions with a clinical pharmacy team. The objective was to report the detection of drug-related problems through a CDSS used by an existing clinical pharmacy team over 22 months. It was a retrospective single-center study. A CDSS was integrated in the clinical pharmacy team in July 2019. The investigating clinical pharmacists evaluated the pharmaceutical relevance and physician acceptance rates for critical alerts (i.e., alerts for drug-related problems arising during on-call periods) and noncritical alerts (i.e., prevention alerts arising during the pharmacist's normal work day) from the CDSS. Of the 3612 alerts triggered, 1554 (43.0%) were critical, and 594 of these 1554 (38.2%) prompted a pharmacist intervention. Of the 2058 (57.0%) noncritical alerts, 475 of these 2058 (23.1%) prompted a pharmacist intervention. About two-thirds of the total pharmacist interventions (PI) were accepted by physicians; the proportion was 71.2% for critical alerts (i.e., 19 critical alerts per month vs. 12.5 noncritical alerts per month). Some alerts were pharmaceutically irrelevant-mainly due to poor performance by the CDSS. Our results suggest that a CDSS is a useful decision-support tool for a hospital pharmacist's clinical practice. It can help to prioritize drug-related problems by distinguishing critical and noncritical alerts. However, building an appropriate organizational structure around the CDSS is important for correct operation.

Improving the usability and usefulness of computerized decision support systems for medication review by clinical pharmacists: A convergent, parallel evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) help hospital-based clinical pharmacists to perform medication reviews and so are promising tools for improving medication safety. However, their poor usability can reduce effectiveness and acceptability. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usability and perceived usefulness of a CDSS for medication review by hospital-based pharmacists and to draw up guidelines on improving its usability. METHODS: We performed a convergent, parallel evaluation. Firstly, three researchers conducted a heuristic evaluation of the CDSS. Secondly, clinical pharmacists who use the CDSS filled out the Usefulness, Satisfaction and Ease of Use (USE) questionnaire. Lastly, semi-structured interviews with the pharmacists enabled us to understand their opinions and experiences. The results of the heuristic evaluation were used to identify potential improvements in the CDSS. We performed a statistical analysis of the USE questionnaire data. Interviews were analyzed based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT), together with a task-technology fit model. The results generated by these three approaches were compared in order to determine convergences and divergences, identify challenges related to the usability and usefulness of the CDSS, and draw up guidelines for its improvement. RESULTS: Forty-seven usability problems were discovered; they variously concerned the graphical user interface, the pharmacists' needs, and the medication review model implemented in the CDSS. Only the "usefulness" dimension of the USE was not scored positively. All the UTAUT dimensions and the task-technology fit dimension emerged in the interviews. Cross-comparisons of the results from the three approaches led to the identification of four challenges and the corresponding formulation of 23 guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The guidelines developed here should help to improve the design and acceptability of CDSSs. Hence, CDSSs will be able to assist clinical pharmacists more fully with their medication reviews and help to further improve patient safety.

Defining explicit definitions of potentially inappropriate prescriptions for antidiabetic drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) of antidiabetic drugs (ADs) (PIPADs) to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have been reported in some studies. The detection of PIPs in electronic databases requires the development of explicit definitions. This approach is widely used in geriatrics but has not been extended to PIPADs in diabetes mellitus. The objective of the present literature review was to identify all explicit definitions of PIPADs in patients with T2DM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature listed on Medline (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, and, Embase between 2010 and 2021. The query included a combination of three concepts ("T2DM" AND "PIPs" AND "ADs") and featured a total of 86 keywords. Two independent reviewers selected publications, extracted explicit definitions of PIPADs, and then classified the definitions by therapeutic class and organ class. RESULTS: Of the 4,093 screened publications, 39 were included. In all, 171 mentions of PIPADs (corresponding to 56 unique explicit definitions) were identified. More than 50% of the definitions were related to either metformin (34%) or sulfonylureas (29%). More than 75% of the definitions were related to either abnormal renal function (56%) or age (22%). In addition, 20% (n = 35) mentions stated that biguanides were inappropriate in patients with renal dysfunction and 17.5% (n = 30) stated that sulfonylureas were inappropriate above a certain age. The definitions of PIPADs were heterogeneous and had various degrees of precision. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that researchers focused primarily on the at-risk situations related to biguanide prescriptions in patients with renal dysfunction and the prescription of sulfonylureas to older people. Our systematic review of the literature revealed a lack of consensus on explicit definitions of PIPADs, which were heterogeneous and limited (in most cases) to a small number of drugs and clinical situations.

Defining Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions for Hypoglycaemic Agents to Improve Computerised Decision Support: A Study Protocol.

In France, around 5% of the general population are taking drug treatments for diabetes mellitus (mainly type 2 diabetes mellitus, T2DM). Although the management of T2DM has become more complex, most of these patients are managed by their general practitioner and not a diabetologist for their antidiabetics treatments; this increases the risk of potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) of hypoglycaemic agents (HAs). Inappropriate prescribing can be assessed by approaches that are implicit (expert judgement based) or explicit (criterion based). In a mixed, multistep process, we first systematically reviewed the published definitions of PIPs for HAs in patients with T2DM. The results will be used to create the first list of explicit definitions. Next, we will complete the definitions identified in the systematic review by conducting a qualitative study with two focus groups of experts in the prescription of HAs. Lastly, a Delphi survey will then be used to build consensus among participants; the results will be validated in consensus meetings. We developed a method for determining explicit definitions of PIPs for HAs in patients with T2DM. The resulting explicit definitions could be easily integrated into computerised decision support tools for the automated detection of PIPs.

Integration of Explicit Criteria in a Clinical Decision Support System Through Evaluation of Acute Kidney Injury Events.

In Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS), relevance of alerts is essential to limit alert fatigue and risk of overriding relevant alerts by health professionals. Detection of acute kidney injury (AKI) situations is of great importance in clinical practice and could improve quality of care. Nevertheless, to our knowledge, no explicit rule has been created to detect AKI situations in CDSS. The objective of the study was to implement an AKI detection rule based on KDIGO criteria in a CDSS and to optimize this rule to increase its relevance in clinical pharmacy use. Two explicit rules were implemented in a CDSS (basic AKI rule and improved AKI rule), based on KDIGO criteria. Only the improved rule was optimized by a group of experts during the two-month study period. The CDSS provided 1,125 alerts on AKI situations (i.e. 643 were triggered for the basic AKI rule and 482 for the improved AKI rule). As the study proceeds, the pharmaceutically and medically relevance of alerts from the improved AKI rule increased. A ten-fold increase was shown for the improved AKI rule compared to the basic AKI rule. The study highlights the usefulness of a multidisciplinary review to enhance explicit rules integrated in CDSS. The improved AKI is able to detect AKI situations and can improve workflow of health professionals.

Medication review and reconciliation in older adults.

Older people are frequently exposed to polypharmacy, inappropriate prescribing, and adverse drug events. Two clinical processes can help geriatricians to optimize and increase the safety of drug prescriptions for older adults: medication reconciliation and medication review. Medication reconciliation provides the best possible medication history and identifies and resolves discrepancies in drug prescriptions. During the medication review, the best possible medication history is crosschecked against other data, including morbidities, patient's preferences, or geriatric syndromes, to produce a personalized medication strategy. Alignment of treatment recommendations with patient preferences and goals through shared decision-making is particularly important in medication review. Medication reconciliation and medication review have proven to be effective, but their broad implementation remains difficult. Indeed, these procedures are time-consuming and require specific skills, coordination between different healthcare professionals, organizations and dedicated means. The involvement of geriatricians therefore remains essential for the successful implementation of medication reconciliation and medication review in geriatric settings and among frail older people.

Community-Acquired Acute Kidney Injury Induced By Drugs In Older Patients: A Multifactorial Event.

PURPOSE: Community-acquired acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) is a frequent and severe adverse drug reaction (ADR) among older patients. The combination of drugs and other CA-AKI risk factors was barely evaluated. The objectives of our study were to both accurately identify CA-AKI induced by drugs in older patients, and to describe their combination with other risk factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study in a general hospital over a two-year period. An automated detection identified CA-AKI according to KDIGO criteria, amongst 4,767 eligible inpatient stays among patients aged 75 years or older. Two independent experts reviewed all CA-AKI events to adjudicate drug involvement (Naranjo scale), identify inappropriate prescriptions (STOPP criteria), evaluate avoidability (Hallas criteria) and identify combined risk factors. RESULTS: An expert review confirmed 713 CA-AKI (15.0% of inpatient stays) and determined that 419 (58.8%) CA-AKI were induced by drugs. A multifactorial cause (i.e., at least one drug with a precipitating factor) was found in 63.2% of drug-induced CA-AKI. Most of the drug-induced events were avoidable (66.8%), mainly in relation to a multifactorial cause. CONCLUSION: Drug-induced CA-AKI were frequent, multifactorial events in hospitalized older patients and their prevention should focus on combinations with precipitating factors.

Hospital-Acquired Hyperkalemia Events in Older Patients Are Mostly Due to Avoidable, Multifactorial, Adverse Drug Reactions.

Drug-induced hyperkalemia is a frequent and severe complication in the hospital setting. Other risk factors may also induce hyperkalemia but the combination of drugs and precipitating factors has not been extensively studied. The aim was to identify drug-induced hyperkalemia events in hospitalized older patients and to describe their combinations with precipitating factors. Two experts independently analyzed retrospective data of patients aged 75 years or more. Experts identified 471 hyperkalemia events and concluded that 379 (80.5%) were induced by drugs. The cause was multifactorial (i.e., at least one drug with a precipitating factor) in 300 (79.2%) of the 379 drug-induced hyperkalemia. Most of the drug-induced hyperkalemia events were avoidable (79.9%)-mainly because of the multifactorial cause (e.g., dosage adaptation during acute kidney injury). Drug-induced hyperkalemia events are frequently combined with precipitating factors in hospitalized older patients and their prevention should focus on these combinations.