Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Primary care clinicians' opinions before and after implementation of cancer screening and prevention clinical decision support in a clinic cluster-randomized control trial: a survey research study.
Harry, Melissa L; Chrenka, Ella A; Freitag, Laura A; Saman, Daniel M; Allen, Clayton I; Asche, Stephen E; Truitt, Anjali R; Ekstrom, Heidi L; O'Connor, Patrick J; Sperl-Hillen, Jo Ann M; Ziegenfuss, Jeanette Y; Elliott, Thomas E.
Afiliación
  • Harry ML; Essentia Institute of Rural Health, 502 E. Second Street, Duluth, MN, 55805, USA. Melissa.Harry@EssentiaHealth.org.
  • Chrenka EA; HealthPartners Institute, 3311 E. Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, MN, 55425, USA.
  • Freitag LA; Essentia Institute of Rural Health, 502 E. Second Street, Duluth, MN, 55805, USA.
  • Saman DM; Essentia Institute of Rural Health, 502 E. Second Street, Duluth, MN, 55805, USA.
  • Allen CI; Carle Foundation Hospital, Clinical Business and Intelligence, 611 W Park St, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA.
  • Asche SE; Essentia Institute of Rural Health, 502 E. Second Street, Duluth, MN, 55805, USA.
  • Truitt AR; HealthPartners Institute, 3311 E. Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, MN, 55425, USA.
  • Ekstrom HL; HealthPartners Institute, 3311 E. Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, MN, 55425, USA.
  • O'Connor PJ; HealthPartners Institute, 3311 E. Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, MN, 55425, USA.
  • Sperl-Hillen JAM; HealthPartners Institute, 3311 E. Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, MN, 55425, USA.
  • Ziegenfuss JY; HealthPartners Institute, 3311 E. Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, MN, 55425, USA.
  • Elliott TE; HealthPartners Institute, 3311 E. Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, MN, 55425, USA.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 22(1): 38, 2022 Jan 06.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34991570
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Electronic health record (EHR)-linked clinical decision support (CDS) may impact primary care clinicians' (PCCs') clinical care opinions. As part of a clinic cluster-randomized control trial (RCT) testing a cancer prevention and screening CDS system with patient and PCC printouts (with or without shared decision-making tools [SDMT]) for patients due for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening and/or human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination compared to usual care (UC), we surveyed PCCs at study clinics pre- and post-CDS implementation. Our primary aim was to learn if PCCs' opinions changed over time within study arms. Secondary aims including examining whether PCCs' opinions in study arms differed both pre- and post-implementation, and gauging PCCs' opinions on the CDS in the two intervention arms.

METHODS:

This study was conducted within a healthcare system serving an upper Midwestern population. We administered pre-implementation (11/2/2017-1/24/2018) and post-implementation (2/2/2020-4/9/2020) cross-sectional electronic surveys to PCCs practicing within a RCT arm UC; CDS; or CDS + SDMT. Bivariate analyses compared responses between study arms at both time periods and longitudinally within study arms.

RESULTS:

Pre-implementation (53%, n = 166) and post-implementation (57%, n = 172) response rates were similar. No significant differences in PCC responses were seen between study arms on cancer prevention and screening questions pre-implementation, with few significant differences found between study arms post-implementation. However, significantly fewer intervention arm clinic PCCs reported being very comfortable with discussing breast cancer screening options with patients compared to UC post-implementation, as well as compared to the same intervention arms pre-implementation. Other significant differences were noted within arms longitudinally. For intervention arms, these differences related to CDS areas like EHR alerts, risk calculators, and ordering screening. Most intervention arm PCCs noted the CDS provided overdue screening alerts to which they were unaware. Few PCCs reported using the CDS, but most would recommend it to colleagues, expressed high CDS satisfaction rates, and thought patients liked the CDS's information and utility.

CONCLUSIONS:

While appreciated by PCCs with high satisfaction rates, the CDS may lower PCCs' confidence regarding discussing patients' breast cancer screening options and may be used irregularly. Future research will evaluate the impact of the CDS on cancer prevention and screening rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov , NCT02986230, December 6, 2016.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas / Neoplasias Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Health Serv Res Asunto de la revista: PESQUISA EM SERVICOS DE SAUDE Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas / Neoplasias Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Health Serv Res Asunto de la revista: PESQUISA EM SERVICOS DE SAUDE Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos