Use and monitoring of "statin" lipid-lowering drugs compared with guidelines.

BACKGROUND: In patients with high cholesterol, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (or "statins") have been shown to reduce overall mortality in primary and secondary prevention. The National Cholesterol Education Program expert panel's guidelines (Adult Treatment Panel II) recommend evaluation and treatment of high cholesterol based on stratification of patients according to cardiovascular risk. While evidence suggests that many patients are undertreated, comparatively few data are available regarding overtreatment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the appropriateness of statin therapy compared with national guidelines and to examine the appropriateness of monitoring for adverse effects. METHODS: For all patients at a tertiary medical center, electronic medical records were evaluated for presence or absence of statin use and for presence of established coronary heart disease or cardiac risk factors. Therapy was compared with the recommendations of the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines. Our primary outcome measures included, for all patients taking statins, prevalence of appropriateness vs overuse, and for all patients with coronary heart disease, prevalence of appropriateness vs underuse. RESULTS: Overuse of statin therapy was found among 69% of patients undergoing primary prevention, and among 47% of patients undergoing secondary prevention. In addition, among patients with coronary heart disease who were not taking statins, 88% were undertreated. Monitoring of liver function varied widely, and did not correlate with the risk of adverse events secondary to statin use. CONCLUSIONS: Overtreatment and undertreatment for hyperlipidemia were frequent. Decision support may help physicians improve their performance compared with guidelines.

Abdominal cross-sectional imaging for inpatients with abnormal liver function test results: yield and usefulness.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal cross-sectional imaging is often performed to evaluate abnormal liver function test (LFT) results in hospitalized patients. However, few data are available regarding the yield and usefulness of imaging inpatients for the indication of abnormal LFT results, the process of requesting abdominal imaging studies, or the response to their findings. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed abdominal imaging scans that were obtained during a 27-month period. We matched the imaging studies done with the indication of abnormal LFT results; all scans were requested using computerized physician order entry. Reports were coded for interpretation and associated process step results. To determine the usefulness of the imaging studies, a random sample of patient charts with positively coded imaging studies were reviewed. Imaging examinations were considered useful if they provided new diagnostic information and/or changed subsequent patient care. RESULTS: Of 6494 abdominal imaging studies, 856 were performed for the indication of abnormal LFT results and matched to both image reports and laboratory results. Report coding judged 37% of interpretations as clinically significant, including 27% with "positive" (abnormal results and explain the abnormal LFT results) examinations. Among the positive examinations, the most common diagnoses were biliary obstruction (25%), cholecystitis (21%), malignancy (20%), and cirrhosis (14%). Positively coded reports provided new clinical information in 63% of these studies and changed patient care in 42% of cases. Process measures assessed provision of additional information to and from radiologists (69% and 8%, respectively) and the frequency with which the findings of current abdominal imaging studies were compared with those of prior studies (59%). CONCLUSION: Abdominal cross-sectional imaging studies performed on inpatients with abnormal LFT results had a high diagnostic yield and frequently changed patient care.

A randomized trial of a computer-based intervention to reduce utilization of redundant laboratory tests.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of giving physicians computerized reminders about apparently redundant clinical laboratory tests. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial that included all inpatients at a large teaching hospital during a 15-week period. The intervention consisted of computerized reminders at the time a test was ordered that appeared to be redundant. Main outcome measures were the proportions of clinical laboratory orders that were canceled and the proportion of the tests that were actually performed. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 939 apparently redundant laboratory tests among the 77,609 study tests that were ordered among the intervention (n = 5,700 patients) and control (n = 5,886 patients) groups. In the intervention group, 69% (300 of 437) of tests were canceled in response to reminders. Of 137 overrides, 41% appeared to be justified based on chart review. In the control group, 51% of ordered redundant tests were performed, whereas in the intervention group only 27% of ordered redundant tests were performed (P <0.001). However, the estimated annual savings in laboratory charges was only $35,000. This occurred because only 44% of redundant tests performed had computer orders, because only half the computer orders were screened for redundancy, and because almost one-third of the reminders were overridden. CONCLUSIONS: Reminders about orders for apparently redundant laboratory tests were effective when delivered. However, the overall effect was limited because many tests were performed without corresponding computer orders, and many orders were not screened for redundancy.

Automated evidence-based critiquing of orders for abdominal radiographs: impact on utilization and appropriateness.

OBJECTIVE: Inappropriate utilization of diagnostic testing has been well documented. The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of presenting real time, evidence-based critiques about the appropriateness of abdominal radiograph (KUB) orders on physician decision making. DESIGN: Prospective trial where evidence-based critiques were presented to ordering clinicians in two kinds of situations: (1) a KUB was likely to have a low probability of providing useful information, or (2) an alternative view(s) was more appropriate given the clinical circumstance. There were two phases of the trial: Phase 1 was a 9-week period where evidence-based critiques were presented at the time of ordering a KUB, followed by Phase 2, a 19-week period in which orderers were randomized to receive critiques either amended to include both institutional data regarding the utility of the critiques and stronger messages about the lack of utility of the study, or the same critiques as presented in Phase 1, depending upon indication. Based upon the radiologist's report of their interpretation of the exams, the results of the examinations were scored as positive, equivocal, or negative using structured criteria. RESULTS: 299 KUBs in Phase 1 and 385 KUBs in Phase 2 received at least one critique. Cancellation rates of low yield films were low, and were similar in Phase 1 and 2, 8/258 (3%) vs. 10/283 (4%). Compliance with the recommendation for alternative view(s) was higher: 19/104 (38%) in Phase 1 vs. 96/176 (55%) in Phase 2 (p = 0.006). The results differentiated low-yield from non-low-yield films: 5% of low-yield films vs. 20% of non-low-yield films were positive in Phase 2 (p < 0.0001). Surgical physicians were less likely to cancel (p = 0.07) or to change to the suggested view(s) (p < 0.0001) than medical physicians or nurses. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention identified clinical situations in which KUBs appeared to have a low clinical yield. In response to evidence-based critiques, providers were reluctant to cancel their order, but were more willing to change to different views. To reduce the number of inappropriate radiographic films, stronger incentives or interventions may be required.

Reducing vancomycin use utilizing a computer guideline: results of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Vancomycin-resistant enterococci represent an increasingly important cause of nosocomial infections. Minimizing vancomycin use represents a key strategy in preventing the spread of these infections. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a structured ordering intervention using computerized physician order entry that requires use of a guideline could reduce intravenous vancomycin use. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial assessing frequency and duration of vancomycin therapy by physicians. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Three hundred ninety-six physicians and 1,798 patients in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. INTERVENTION: Computer screen displaying, at the time of physician order entry, an adaptation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for appropriate vancomycin use. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The frequency of initiation and renewal of vancomycin therapy as well the duration of therapy prescribed on a per prescriber basis. RESULTS: Compared with the control group, intervention physicians wrote 32 percent fewer orders (11.3 versus 16.7 orders per physician; P = 0.04) and had 28 percent fewer patients for whom they either initiated or renewed an order for vancomycin (7.4 versus 10.3 orders per physician; P = 0.02). In addition, the duration of vancomycin therapy attributable to physicians in the intervention group was 36 percent lower than the duration of therapy prescribed by control physicians (26.5 versus 41.2 days; P = 0.05). Analysis of pharmacy data confirmed a decrease in the overall hospital use of intravenous vancomycin during the study period. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a computerized guideline using physician order entry decreased vancomycin use. Computerized guidelines represent a promising tool for changing prescribing practices.

Improving response to critical laboratory results with automation: results of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of an automatic alerting system on the time until treatment is ordered for patients with critical laboratory results. DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial. INTERVENTION: A computer system to detect critical conditions and automatically notify the responsible physician via the hospital's paging system. PATIENTS: Medical and surgical inpatients at a large academic medical center. One two-month study period for each service. MAIN OUTCOMES: Interval from when a critical result was available for review until an appropriate treatment was ordered. Secondary outcomes were the time until the critical condition resolved and the frequency of adverse events. METHODS: The alerting system looked for 12 conditions involving laboratory results and medications. For intervention patients, the covering physician was automatically notified about the presence of the results. For control patients, no automatic notification was made. Chart review was performed to determine the outcomes. RESULTS: After exclusions, 192 alerting situations (94 interventions, 98 controls) were analyzed. The intervention group had a 38 percent shorter median time interval (1.0 hours vs. 1.6 hours, P = 0.003; mean, 4.1 vs. 4.6 hours, P = 0.003) until an appropriate treatment was ordered. The time until the alerting condition resolved was less in the intervention group (median, 8.4 hours vs. 8.9 hours, P = 0.11; mean, 14.4 hours vs. 20.2 hours, P = 0.11), although these results did not achieve statistical significance. The impact of the intervention was more pronounced for alerts that did not meet the laboratory's critical reporting criteria. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the number of adverse events. CONCLUSION: An automatic alerting system reduced the time until an appropriate treatment was ordered for patients who had critical laboratory results. Information technologies that facilitate the transmission of important patient data can potentially improve the quality of care.

Relationship between documentation method and quality of chronic disease visit notes.

OBJECTIVE: To assses the relationship between methods of documenting visit notes and note quality for primary care providers (PCPs) and specialists, and to determine the factors that contribute to higher quality notes for two chronic diseases. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of visit notes at two academic medical centers. Two physicians rated the subjective quality of content areas of the note (vital signs, medications, lifestyle, labs, symptoms, assessment & plan), overall quality, and completed the 9 item Physician Documentation Quality Instrument (PDQI-9). We evaluated quality ratings in relation to the primary method of documentation (templates, free-form or dictation) for both PCPs and specialists. A one factor analysis of variance test was used to examine differences in mean quality scores among the methods. RESULTS: A total of 112 physicians, 71 primary care physicians (PCP) and 41 specialists, wrote 240 notes. For specialists, templated notes had the highest overall quality scores (p≤0.001) while for PCPs, there was no statistically significant difference in overall quality score. For PCPs, free form received higher quality ratings on vital signs (p = 0.01), labs (p = 0.002), and lifestyle (p = 0.002) than other methods; templated notes had a higher rating on medications (p≤0.001). For specialists, templated notes received higher ratings on vital signs, labs, lifestyle and medications (p = 0.001). DISCUSSION: There was no significant difference in subjective quality of visit notes written using free-form documentation, dictation or templates for PCPs. The subjective quality rating of templated notes was higher than that of dictated notes for specialists. CONCLUSION: As there is wide variation in physician documentation methods, and no significant difference in note quality between methods, recommending one approach for all physicians may not deliver optimal results.

A process to maintain the quality of a computerized knowledge base.

As part of a project to develop knowledge-based reminders for the outpatient setting, we developed a process to help maintain the quality of the knowledge base. The knowledge engineering process involved many parties, including several domain experts, a knowledge engineer, and a programmer and a process was necessary to assure that information transfer among individuals did not become confused. An MS Access database was created to store, among other data, textual versions of the rules as they evolved over time. In a 9-month period 36 rules were entered into the database. Of those, 17 are still active in their original form. The remaining 19 underwent various types of modifications; these changes were tracked in the database. Processes and tools to maintain knowledge bases are necessary if the benefits of clinical decision support systems are to be realized and investments in knowledge engineering are to be protected.

Evaluating physician satisfaction regarding user interactions with an electronic medical record system.

A limiting factor in realizing the full potential of electronic medical records (EMR) is physician reluctance to use these applications. There have been very few formal usability studies of experienced physician users of EMRs in routine clinical use. We distributed the Questionnaire for User Interaction Satisfaction (QUIS) to 75 primary care physicians who routinely use the Brigham and Women's Integrated Computing System (BICS). BICS scored highest in the area of screen design and lowest in the area of system capability. Overall user satisfaction was most highly correlated with screen design and layout, and surprisingly not with system response time. Human-computer interaction studies can help focus our design efforts as we strive to increase clinician usage of information technology.

Towards improving the accuracy of the clinical database: allowing outpatients to review their computerized data.

We developed an application that allowed patients coming to the clinic to review on a paper form their computerized health maintenance, medication, and allergy data. The patient could edit the paper form and the physician then could enter the new data into the database. We implemented the system in 4 clinics (17 MDs) To evaluate the system, we reviewed 80 forms from one physician's patients to determine how often patients provided new data. We also sent questionnaires to the physicians asking for their estimates of how often there was new data and for their impression of the system. We interviewed secretaries in the clinics about logistical issues. Of the 80 forms, 29 (36%) had new data; 28% had new health maintenance data and 19% had new medication data. The 7 physicians who responded to the questionnaire estimated that new health maintenance data were present on 22% of the forms. The physicians who responded to the questionnaire felt the system was useful. The secretaries said that managing the paper flow in the clinic was often unwieldy and in some clinics, the system has been abandoned or is used intermittently. Having patients review their data is one avenue to improving the accuracy of computerized records.

Using an electronic medical record to identify opportunities to improve compliance with cholesterol guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To use an electronic medical record to measure rates of compliance with the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) cholesterol guidelines for secondary prevention, to characterize the patterns of noncompliance, and to identify patient and physician-specific correlates of noncompliance. DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of data extracted from an electronic medical record. SETTING: Nineteen primary care clinics affiliated with a tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: All patients who visited their primary care physician in the preceding year who met criteria for secondary prevention of hypercholesterolemia. INTERVENTIONS: None. The main outcome was rate of compliance with NCEP cholesterol guidelines. MAIN RESULTS: Of 2,019 patients who qualified for secondary prevention, only 31% were in compliance with NCEP recommendations, although 44% were on lipid-lowering therapy. There was no low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) on record within the last three years for 771 (38%), and another 809 (40%) had a recent LDL-C that was above the recommended target of 100 mg/dL. Of the latter group, 374 (46%) were not on a statin, including 188 patients with an LDL-C >130 mg/dL. Compliance among secondary prevention patients with cerebrovascular or peripheral vascular disease, but not coronary disease, was even lower: 19% versus 36%, P <.0001. Most of the additional noncompliant patients never had an LDL-C checked. Patient-specific factors associated with compliance included having seen a cardiologist (45% vs 21%); having had a recent admission for myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or angina (41% vs 26%); being male (37% vs 24%); and being white (34% vs 26%). Patients over 79 and under 50 years old also were less likely to be compliant (22% vs 34% for 50-79 year olds). There were no significant differences in compliance rates based on physician-specific factors, such as level of training, gender, or panel size. CONCLUSION: We found poor compliance with nationally published and well-accepted guidelines on diagnosing and treating hypercholesterolemia in secondary prevention patients. Compliance was unrelated to physician or physician-specific characteristics, but it was especially low for women, African Americans, patients without a cardiologist, and patients with cerebrovascular and peripheral vascular disease.

A computer based intervention to reduce unnecessary serologic testing.

OBJECTIVE: Laboratory testing is important in the evaluation of patients with possible systemic rheumatic disease, but uncritical use of any test may result in misleading information and unnecessary costs. We attempted to reduce the number of unnecessary antinuclear antibody, rheumatoid factor, and complement level tests ordered by house officers at a large teaching hospital, where inpatient orders are written through a computer based order entry system. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of an interactive test ordering program. The intervention consisted of displaying post-test probability estimates during the usual physician order entry session. These estimates were based on pretest probabilities entered by the ordering physician and sensitivities and specificities derived from a literature review. Another group of test orders did not prompt the intervention and were considered controls. The outcome of interest was the percentage of tests canceled in the intervention group versus the control group. RESULTS: Eleven percent (11/99) of intervention orders were canceled, versus only one order among 236 controls (p = 0.001). However, there was no association between the physicians' pretest probability estimates and whether test orders were canceled (p = 0.59). Additionally, 43 of the 335 orders (13%) yielded positive tests, but only 4 patients (1%) were given new diagnoses of rheumatic disease. CONCLUSION: The computer based intervention significantly reduced orders for antinuclear antibody and rheumatoid factor levels by 10%. Further reductions without clinical harm are probably possible, since the yield of testing for new rheumatic diseases was low.