Clinical decision support in promoting evidence-based nursing in primary healthcare: a cross-sectional study in Finland.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The aim was to explore clinical decision support (CDS) use in the practice of primary healthcare nurses. The objectives were to recognize to what extent nurses (registered nurses, public health nurses, and practical nurses) use CDS, what factors were associated with the CDS used, what kind of organizational support nurses need, and what were nurses' views about CDS development needs. METHODS: The study was conducted with a cross-sectional study design, using an electronic questionnaire developed for this purpose. The questionnaire contained 14 structured questions and nine open-ended questions. The sample consisted of randomly selected primary healthcare organizations ( N  = 19) in Finland. Quantitative data were analyzed using cross-tabulation and Pearson's chi-squared test, and qualitative data with quantification. RESULTS: A total of 267 healthcare professionals (age range 22-63 years) volunteered to participate. Participants were mainly registered nurses, public health nurses, and practical nurses (46.8, 24, and 22.9%, respectively). Overall, 59% of the participants had never used CDS. The majority (92%) found it necessary to develop nursing-specific content for CDS. The most commonly used features were medication recommendations and warnings (74%), reminders (56%), and calculators (42%). Half of the participants (51%) had not received training on the use of CDS. The older age of participants was associated with the feeling of not having enough training to use CDS ( P  = 0.039104). Nurses felt that CDS was helpful in their clinical work and decision-making, promoting evidence-based practice, and narrowing the research-into-practice gap, improving patient safety and the quality of care, and helping those who are new in their work. CONCLUSION: CDS and its support structures should be developed from a nursing perspective to achieve the full potential of CDS in nursing practice.

Making science computable: Developing code systems for statistics, study design, and risk of bias.

The COVID-19 crisis led a group of scientific and informatics experts to accelerate development of an infrastructure for electronic data exchange for the identification, processing, and reporting of scientific findings. The Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR®) standard which is overcoming the interoperability problems in health information exchange was extended to evidence-based medicine (EBM) knowledge with the EBMonFHIR project. A 13-step Code System Development Protocol was created in September 2020 to support global development of terminologies for exchange of scientific evidence. For Step 1, we assembled expert working groups with 55 people from 26 countries by October 2020. For Step 2, we identified 23 commonly used tools and systems for which the first version of code systems will be developed. For Step 3, a total of 368 non-redundant concepts were drafted to become display terms for four code systems (Statistic Type, Statistic Model, Study Design, Risk of Bias). Steps 4 through 13 will guide ongoing development and maintenance of these terminologies for scientific exchange. When completed, the code systems will facilitate identifying, processing, and reporting research results and the reliability of those results. More efficient and detailed scientific communication will reduce cost and burden and improve health outcomes, quality of life, and patient, caregiver, and healthcare professional satisfaction. We hope the achievements reached thus far will outlive COVID-19 and provide an infrastructure to make science computable for future generations. Anyone may join the effort at https://www.gps.health/covid19_knowledge_accelerator.html.

Guiding principles for the use of knowledge bases and real-world data in clinical decision support systems: report by an international expert workshop at Karolinska Institutet.

INTRODUCTION: Technical and logical breakthroughs have provided new opportunities in medicine to use knowledge bases and large-scale clinical data (real-world) at point-of-care as part of a learning healthcare system to diminish the knowledge-practice gap. AREAS COVERED: The article is based on presentations, discussions and recommendations from an international scientific workshop. Value, research needs and funding avenues of knowledge bases and access to real-world data as well as transparency and incorporation of patient perspectives are discussed. EXPERT OPINION: Evidence-based, publicly funded, well-structured and curated knowledge bases are of global importance. They ought to be considered as a public responsibility requiring transparency and handling of conflicts of interest. Information has to be made accessible for clinical decision support systems (CDSS) for healthcare staff and patients. Access to rich and real-world data is essential for a learning health care ecosystem and can be augmented by data on patient-reported outcomes and preferences. This field can progress by the establishment of an international policy group for developing a best practice guideline on the development, maintenance, governance, evaluation principles and financing of open-source knowledge bases and handling of real-world data.

Use of an electronic decision support tool to reduce polypharmacy in elderly people with chronic diseases: cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of a computerised decision support tool for comprehensive drug review in elderly people with polypharmacy. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 359 general practices in Austria, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 3904 adults aged 75 years and older using eight or more drugs on a regular basis, recruited by their general practitioner. INTERVENTION: A newly developed electronic decision support tool comprising a comprehensive drug review to support general practitioners in deprescribing potentially inappropriate and non-evidence based drugs. Doctors were randomly allocated to either the electronic decision support tool or to provide treatment as usual. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the composite of unplanned hospital admission or death by 24 months. The key secondary outcome was reduction in the number of drugs. RESULTS: 3904 adults were enrolled between January and October 2015. 181 practices and 1953 participants were assigned to electronic decision support (intervention group) and 178 practices and 1951 participants to treatment as usual (control group). The primary outcome (composite of unplanned hospital admission or death by 24 months) occurred in 871 (44.6%) participants in the intervention group and 944 (48.4%) in the control group. In an intention-to-treat analysis the odds ratio of the composite outcome was 0.88 (95% confidence interval 0.73 to 1.07; P=0.19, 997 of 1953 v 1055 of 1951). In an analysis restricted to participants attending practice according to protocol, a difference was found favouring the intervention (odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 0.98; 774 of 1682 v 873 of 1712, P=0.03). By 24 months the number of prescribed drugs had decreased in the intervention group compared with control group (uncontrolled mean change -0.42 v 0.06: adjusted mean difference -0.45, 95% confidence interval -0.63 to -0.26; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In intention-to-treat analysis, a computerised decision support tool for comprehensive drug review of elderly people with polypharmacy showed no conclusive effects on the composite of unplanned hospital admission or death by 24 months. Nonetheless, a reduction in drugs was achieved without detriment to patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10137559.

Computerized clinical decision support system for diabetes in primary care does not improve quality of care: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The EBMeDS system is the computerized clinical decision support (CCDS) system of EBPNet, a national computerized point-of-care information service in Belgium. There is no clear evidence of more complex CCDS systems to manage chronic diseases in primary care practices (PCPs). The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of EBMeDS use in improving diabetes care. METHODS: A cluster-randomized trial with before-and-after measurements was performed in Belgian PCPs over 1 year, from May 2017 to May 2018. We randomly assigned 51 practices to either the intervention group (IG), to receive the EBMeDS system, or to the control group (CG), to receive usual care. Primary and secondary outcomes were the 1-year pre- to post-implementation change in HbA1c, LDL cholesterol, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Composite patient and process scores were calculated. A process evaluation was added to the analysis. Results were analyzed at 6 and 12 months. Linear mixed models and logistic regression models based on generalized estimating equations were used where appropriate. RESULTS: Of the 51 PCPs that were enrolled and randomly assigned (26 PCPs in the CG and 25 in the IG), 29 practices (3815 patients) were analyzed in the study: 2464 patients in the CG and 1351 patients in the IG. No change differences existed between groups in primary or secondary outcomes. Change difference between CG and IG after 1-year follow-up was - 0.09 (95% CI - 0.18; 0.01, p-value = 0.06) for HbA1c; 1.76 (95% CI - 0.46; 3.98, p-value = 0.12) for LDL cholesterol; and 0.13 (95% CI - 0.91; 1.16, p-value = 0.81) and 0.12 (95% CI - 1.25;1.49, p-value = 0.86) for systolic and diastolic blood pressure respectively. The odds ratio of the IG versus the CG for the probability of no worsening and improvement was 1.09 (95% CI 0.73; 1.63, p-value = 0.67) for the process composite score and 0.74 (95% CI 0.49; 1.12, p-value = 0.16) for the composite patient score. All but one physician was satisfied with the EBMeDS system. CONCLUSIONS: The CCDS system EBMeDS did not improve diabetes care in Belgian primary care. The lack of improvement was mainly caused by imperfections in the organizational context of Belgian primary care for chronic disease management and shortcomings in the system requirements for the correct use of the EBMeDS system (e.g., complete structured records). These shortcomings probably caused low-use rates of the system. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01830569, Registered 12 April 2013.

Effectiveness of a Hospital-Based Computerized Decision Support System on Clinician Recommendations and Patient Outcomes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Sophisticated evidence-based information resources can filter medical evidence from the literature, integrate it into electronic health records, and generate recommendations tailored to individual patients. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of a computerized clinical decision support system (CDSS) that preappraises evidence and provides health professionals with actionable, patient-specific recommendations at the point of care. Design, Setting, and Participants: Open-label, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial among internal medicine wards of a large Italian general hospital. All analyses in this randomized clinical trial followed the intent-to-treat principle. Between November 1, 2015, and December 31, 2016, patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group, in which CDSS-generated reminders were displayed to physicians, or to the control group, in which reminders were generated but not shown. Data were analyzed between February 1 and July 31, 2018. Interventions: Evidence-Based Medicine Electronic Decision Support (EBMEDS), a commercial CDSS covering a wide array of health conditions across specialties, was integrated into the hospital electronic health records to generate patient-specific recommendations. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the resolution rate, the rate at which medical problems identified and alerted by the CDSS were addressed by a change in practice. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay and in-hospital all-cause mortality. Results: In this randomized clinical trial, 20 563 patients were admitted to the hospital. Of these, 6480 (31.5%) were admitted to the internal medicine wards (study population) and randomized (3242 to CDSS and 3238 to control). The mean (SD) age of patients was 70.5 (17.3) years, and 54.5% were men. In total, 28 394 reminders were generated throughout the course of the trial (median, 3 reminders per patient per hospital stay; interquartile range [IQR], 1-6). These messages led to a change in practice in approximately 4 of 100 patients. The resolution rate was 38.0% (95% CI, 37.2%-38.8%) in the intervention group and 33.7% (95% CI, 32.9%-34.4%) in the control group, corresponding to an odds ratio of 1.21 (95% CI, 1.11-1.32; P < .001). The length of hospital stay did not differ between the groups, with a median time of 8 days (IQR, 5-13 days) for the intervention group and a median time of 8 days (IQR, 5-14 days) for the control group (P = .36). In-hospital all-cause mortality also did not differ between groups (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77-1.17; P = .59). Alert fatigue did not differ between early and late study periods. Conclusions and Relevance: An international commercial CDSS intervention marginally influenced routine practice in a general hospital, although the change did not statistically significantly affect patient outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02577198.

Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension.

Importance: Hypertension is very common, but guideline recommendations for hypertension have been controversial, are of increasing interest, and have profound implications. Objective: To systematically assess the consistency of recommendations regarding hypertension management across clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of hypertension management recommendations included CPGs that had been published as of April 2018. Two point-of-care resources that provided graded recommendations were included for secondary analyses. Discrete and unambiguous specifications of the population, intervention, and comparison states were used to define a series of reference recommendations. Three raters reached consensus on coding the direction and strength of each recommendation made by each CPG. Three independent raters reached consensus on the importance of each reference recommendation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were rates of consistency for direction and strength among CPGs. Sensitivity analyses testing the robustness were conducted by excluding recommendation statements that were described as insufficient evidence, excluding single recommendation sources, and stratifying by importance of recommendations. Results: The analysis included 8 CPGs with a total of 71 reference recommendations, 68 of which had clear recommendations from 2 or more CPGs. Across CPGs, 22 recommendations (32%) were consistent in direction and strength, 18 recommendations (27%) were consistent in direction but inconsistent in strength, and 28 recommendations (41%) were inconsistent in direction. The rate of consistency was lower in secondary analyses. When insufficient evidence ratings were excluded, there was still substantial inconsistency, and a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis suggested the inconsistency could not be attributed to any single recommendation source. Inconsistency in direction was more common for recommendations deemed to be of lower importance (11 of 20 recommendations [55%]), but 17 of 48 high-importance recommendations (35%) had inconsistency in direction. Conclusions and Relevance: Hypertension is a common chronic condition with widespread expectations surrounding guideline-based care, yet CPGs have a high rate of inconsistency. Further investigations should determine the reasons for inconsistency, the implications for recommendation development, and the role of synthesis across recommendations for optimal guidance of clinical care.

Defining certainty of net benefit: a GRADE concept paper.

Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology is used to assess and report certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. This GRADE concept article is not GRADE guidance but introduces certainty of net benefit, defined as the certainty that the balance between desirable and undesirable health effects is favourable. Determining certainty of net benefit requires considering certainty of effect estimates, the expected importance of outcomes and variability in importance, and the interaction of these concepts. Certainty of net harm is the certainty that the net effect is unfavourable. Guideline panels using or testing this approach might limit strong recommendations to actions with a high certainty of net benefit or against actions with a moderate or high certainty of net harm. Recommendations may differ in direction or strength from that suggested by the certainty of net benefit or harm when influenced by cost, equity, acceptability or feasibility.

Applicability of Motivational Interviewing for Chronic Disease Management in Primary Care Following a Web-Based E-Learning Course: Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Motivational interviewing (MI) is an established communication method for enhancing intrinsic motivation for changing health behavior. E-learning can reduce the cost and time involved in providing continuing education and can be easily integrated into individual working arrangements and the daily routines of medical professionals. Thus, a Web-based course was devised to familiarize health professionals with different levels of education and expertise with MI techniques for patients with chronic conditions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report participants' opinion on the practicality of MI (as learned in the course) in daily practice, stratified by the level of education. METHODS: Participants (N=607) of the MI Web-based training course evaluated the course over 18 months, using a self-administered questionnaire. The evaluation was analyzed descriptively and stratified for the level of education (medical students, physicians in specialist training [PSTs], and general practitioners [GPs]). RESULTS: Participants rated the applicability of the skills and knowledge gained by the course as positive (medical students: 94% [79/84] good; PSTs: 88.6% [109/123] excellent; and GPs: 51.3% [182/355] excellent). When asked whether they envisage the use of MI in the future, 79% (67/84) of the students stated to a certain extent, 88.6% (109/123) of the PSTs stated to a great extent, and 38.6% (137/355) of GPs stated to a great extent. Participants acknowledged an improvement of communication skills such as inviting (medical students: 85% [72/84]; PSTs: 90.2% [111/123]; GPs: 37.2% [132/355]) and encouraging (medical students: 81% [68/84]; PSTs: 45.5% [56/123]; GPs: 36.3% [129/355]) patients to talk about behavior change and conveying respect for patient's choices (medical students: 72% [61/84]; PSTs: 50.0% [61/123]; GPs: 23.4% [83/355]). CONCLUSIONS: Participants confirmed the practicality of MI. However, the extent to which the practicality of MI was acknowledged as well as its expected benefits depended on the individual's level of education/expertise.

Secondary hypertension in patients with saccular intracranial aneurysm disease: A population based study.

BACKGROUND: Secondary hypertension is a serious form of hypertension, involving 5% to 10% of all hypertension patients. Hypertension is a risk factor of the saccular intracranial aneurysm (sIA) disease and subarachnoid hemorrhage from ruptured sIA (aSAH), but the impact of secondary hypertension on sIA disease is poorly known. In a defined Eastern Finnish sIA population we studied the prevalence of secondary hypertension and its impact on sIA disease phenotype. METHODS: We included 2704 consecutive sIA patients first admitted to Kuopio University Hospital from 1995 to 2014. Their clinical data from Kuopio Intracranial Aneurysm patient and Family Database was fused with prescription drug usage data, hospital diagnoses and causes of death, retrieved from nationwide registries. Medical records of hypertensive sIA patients were reviewed to confirm or exclude secondary hypertension. Prevalence of secondary hypertension and associated diagnoses were calculated. Logistic regression was used to identify clinical characteristics of sIA disease that associated with secondary hypertension. RESULTS: We identified 2029 (75%) sIA patients with hypertension and 208 (10%) of them had secondary hypertension. Most frequent conditions associated with secondary hypertension were kidney and renovascular diseases (45%), sleep apnea (27%) and hypothyroidism (19%); 46 (22%) of the 208 patients had more than one such condition. In multivariate logistic regression analyses of 1561 aSAH patients, secondary hypertension significantly associated with the number of sIAs (p = 0.003; OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.10-1.58) and male gender (p = 0.034; OR 1.59; 95% CI 1.04-2.43). CONCLUSIONS: Secodary hypertension was relatively common (10%) among hypertensive sIA patients. Secondary causes for hypertension should be taken into account in hypertensive sIA patients, especially in aSAH patients with multiple intracranial aneurysms. Further research is indicated to evaluate the impact of secondary hypertension on the long-term rupture risk of unruptured sIA carriers and long-term outcome after aSAH.

Does patient self-management education of primary care professionals improve patient outcomes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient self-management support is recognised as a key component of chronic care. Education and training for health professionals has been shown in the literature to be associated with better uptake, implementation and effectiveness of self-management programs, however, there is no clear evidence regarding whether this training results in improved health outcomes for patients with chronic conditions. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken using the PRISMA guidelines using the Cochrane Library, PubMEd, ERIC, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web searches, Hand searches and Bibliographies. Articles published from inception to September 1st, 2013 were included. Systematic reviews, Meta-analysis, Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), Controlled clinical trials, Interrupted time series and Controlled before and after studies, which reported on primary care health professionals' continuing education or evidence-based medicine/education on patient self-management for any chronic condition, were included. A minimum of two reviewers participated independently at each stage of review. RESULTS: From 7533 abstracts found, only two papers provided evidence on the effectiveness of self-management education for primary healthcare professionals in terms of measured outcomes in patients. These two articles show improvement in patient outcomes for chronic back pain and diabetes based on RCTs. The educational interventions with health professionals spanned a range of techniques and modalities but both RCTs included a motivational interviewing component. CONCLUSIONS: Before and up to 2 years after the incorporation of patient empowerment for self-management into the WONCA Europe definition of general practice, there was a scarcity of high quality evidence showing improved outcomes for patients as a result of educating health professionals in patient self-management of chronic conditions.

A systematic review of trials evaluating success factors of interventions with computerised clinical decision support.

BACKGROUND: Computerised clinical decision support (CDS) can potentially better inform decisions, and it can help with the management of information overload. It is perceived to be a key component of a learning health care system. Despite its increasing implementation worldwide, it remains uncertain why the effect of CDS varies and which factors make CDS more effective. OBJECTIVE: To examine which factors make CDS strategies more effective on a number of outcomes, including adherence to recommended practice, patient outcome measures, economic measures, provider or patient satisfaction, and medical decision quality. METHODS: We identified randomised controlled trials, non-randomised trials, and controlled before-and-after studies that directly compared CDS implementation with a given factor to CDS without that factor by searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL and checking reference lists of relevant studies. We considered CDS with any objective for any condition in any healthcare setting. We included CDS interventions that were either displayed on screen or provided on paper and that were directed at healthcare professionals or targeted at both professionals and patients. The reviewers screened the potentially relevant studies in duplicate. They extracted data and assessed risk of bias in independent pairs or individually followed by a double check by another reviewer. We summarised results using medians and interquartile ranges and rated our certainty in the evidence using the GRADE system. RESULTS: We identified 66 head-to-head trials that we synthesised across 14 comparisons of CDS intervention factors. Providing CDS automatically versus on demand led to large improvements in adherence. Displaying CDS on-screen versus on paper led to moderate improvements and making CDS more versus less patient-specific improved adherence modestly. When CDS interventions were combined with professional-oriented strategies, combined with patient-oriented strategies, or combined with staff-oriented strategies, then adherence improved slightly. Providing CDS to patients slightly increased adherence versus CDS aimed at the healthcare provider only. Making CDS advice more explicit and requiring users to respond to the advice made little or no difference. The CDS intervention factors made little or no difference to patient outcomes. The results for economic outcomes and satisfaction outcomes were sparse. CONCLUSION: Multiple factors may affect the success of CDS interventions. CDS may be more effective when the advice is provided automatically and displayed on-screen and when the suggestions are more patient-specific. CDS interventions combined with other strategies probably also improves adherence. Providing CDS directly to patients may also positively affect adherence. The certainty of the evidence was low to moderate for all factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42016033738.

Polypharmacy in older patients with chronic diseases: a cross-sectional analysis of factors associated with excessive polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is common in older people and associated with potential harms. The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of an older multimorbid population with polypharmacy and to identify factors contributing to excessive polypharmacy in these patients. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis is based on the PRIMA-eDS trial, a large randomised controlled multicentre study of polypharmacy in primary care. Patients' baseline data were used for analysis. A number of socioeconomic and medical data as well as SF-12-scores were entered into a generalized linear mixed model to identify variables associated with excessive polypharmacy (taking ≥10 substances daily). RESULTS: Three thousand nine hundred four participants were recruited. Risk factors significantly associated with excessive polypharmacy were frailty (OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.22-1.71), > 8 diagnoses (OR 2.64; 95% CI 2.24-3.11), BMI ≥30 (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.02-1.38), a lower SF-12 physical health composite score (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.26-1.72), and a lower SF-12 mental health composite score (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.17-1.59) than the median of the study population (≤36.6 and ≤ 48.7, respectively). Age ≥ 85 years (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.70-0.99) led to a significantly lower risk for excessive polypharmacy. No association with excessive polypharmacy could be found for female sex, low educational level, and smoking. Regarding the study centres, being recruited in the UK led to a significantly higher risk for excessive polypharmacy compared to being recruited in Germany 1/Rostock (OR 1.71; 95% CI 1.27-2.30). Being recruited in Germany 2/Witten led to a slightly significant lower risk for excessive polypharmacy compared to Germany 1/Rostock (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty, multimorbidity, obesity, and decreased physical as well as mental health status are risk factors for excessive polypharmacy. Sex, educational level, and smoking apparently do not seem to be related to excessive polypharmacy. Physicians should especially pay attention to their frail, obese patients who have multiple diagnoses and a decreased health-related quality of life, to check carefully whether all the drugs prescribed are evidence-based, safe, and do not interact in an unfavourable way. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered with Current Controlled Trials Ltd. on 31 July 2014 (ISRCTN10137559).

α-Blockers for uncomplicated ureteric stones: a clinical practice guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an evidence-based recommendation concerning the use of α-blockers for uncomplicated ureteric stones based on an up-to-date Cochrane review, as the role of medical expulsive therapy for uncomplicated ureteric stones remains controversial in the light of new contradictory trial evidence. METHODS: We applied the Rapid Recommendations approach to guideline development, which represents an innovative approach by an international collaborative network of clinicians, researchers, methodologists and patient representatives seeking to rapidly respond to new, potentially practice-changing evidence with recommendations developed according to standards for trustworthy guidelines. RESULTS: The panel suggests the use of α-blockers in addition to standard care over standard care alone in patients with uncomplicated ureteric stones (weak recommendation based on low-quality evidence). The panel judged that the net benefit of α-blockers was small and that there was considerable uncertainty about patients' values and preferences. This means that the panel expects that most patients would choose treatment with α-blockers but that a substantial proportion would not. This recommendation applies to both patients in whom the presence of ureteric stones is confirmed by imaging, as well as patients in whom the diagnosis is made based on clinical grounds only. CONCLUSION: The Rapid Recommendations panel suggests the use of α-blockers for patients with ureteric stones. Shared decision-making is emphasised in making the final choice between the treatment options.

Development of a Tailored Intervention With Computerized Clinical Decision Support to Improve Quality of Care for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: Multi-Method Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice patterns greatly diverge from evidence-based recommendations to manage knee osteoarthritis conservatively before resorting to surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to tailor a guideline-based computerized decision support (CDS) intervention that facilitates the conservative management of knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: Experts with backgrounds in clinical medicine, research, implementation, or health informatics suggested the most important recommendations for implementation, how to develop an implementation strategy, and how to form the CDS algorithms. In 6 focus group sessions, 8 general practitioners and 22 patients from Norway, Belgium, and Finland discussed the suggested CDS intervention and identified factors that would be most critical for the success of the intervention. The focus group moderators used the GUideline Implementation with DEcision Support checklist, which we developed to support consideration of CDS success factors. RESULTS: The experts prioritized 9 out of 22 recommendations for implementation. We formed the concept for 6 CDS algorithms to support implementation of these recommendations. The focus group suggested 59 unique factors that could affect the success of the presented CDS intervention. Five factors (out of the 59) were prioritized by focus group participants in every country, including the perceived potential to address the information needs of both patients and general practitioners; the credibility of CDS information; the timing of CDS for patients; and the need for personal dialogue about CDS between the general practitioner and the patient. CONCLUSIONS: The focus group participants supported the CDS intervention as a tool to improve the quality of care for patients with knee osteoarthritis through shared, evidence-based decision making. We aim to develop and implement the CDS based on these study results. Future research should address optimal ways to (1) provide patient-directed CDS, (2) enable more patient-specific CDS within the context of patient complexity, and (3) maintain user engagement with CDS over time.

The GUIDES checklist: development of a tool to improve the successful use of guideline-based computerised clinical decision support.

BACKGROUND: Computerised decision support (CDS) based on trustworthy clinical guidelines is a key component of a learning healthcare system. Research shows that the effectiveness of CDS is mixed. Multifaceted context, system, recommendation and implementation factors may potentially affect the success of CDS interventions. This paper describes the development of a checklist that is intended to support professionals to implement CDS successfully. METHODS: We developed the checklist through an iterative process that involved a systematic review of evidence and frameworks, a synthesis of the success factors identified in the review, feedback from an international expert panel that evaluated the checklist in relation to a list of desirable framework attributes, consultations with patients and healthcare consumers and pilot testing of the checklist. RESULTS: We screened 5347 papers and selected 71 papers with relevant information on success factors for guideline-based CDS. From the selected papers, we developed a 16-factor checklist that is divided in four domains, i.e. the CDS context, content, system and implementation domains. The panel of experts evaluated the checklist positively as an instrument that could support people implementing guideline-based CDS across a wide range of settings globally. Patients and healthcare consumers identified guideline-based CDS as an important quality improvement intervention and perceived the GUIDES checklist as a suitable and useful strategy. CONCLUSIONS: The GUIDES checklist can support professionals in considering the factors that affect the success of CDS interventions. It may facilitate a deeper and more accurate understanding of the factors shaping CDS effectiveness. Relying on a structured approach may prevent that important factors are missed.

Correction to: Effectiveness and safety of vitamin K antagonists and new anticoagulants in the prevention of thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation in older adults - a systematic review of reviews and the development of recommendations to reduce inappropriate prescribing.

CORRECTION: After publication of the original article [1] it was found that author Marc Krause's name had been spelt incorrectly. In the original article it is presented as Mark Krause, rather than Marc Krause. The revised spelling has been included in the author list for this Correction.

Exploring guideline adaptation strategy for Turkey: Is "ADAPTE" feasible or does it need adaptation as well?

RATIONALE, AIMS, OBJECTIVES: Clinical Practice Guidelines are mostly developed by 3 methods; namely, de novo, adoption, and adaptation. Nonpublished studies and authors experience shows that most guidelines in Turkey are either by adoption or by adaptation. There is no available local tool for adaptation, so the process is not standardized and most of the time not explicitly defined. The objective of this study is to search for international guideline adaptation tools and test their feasibility in Turkish context, to serve a final goal of developing a unique local strategic tool for guideline adaptation. METHODS: The methodological design of this study includes selection of an international tool for Clinical Practice Guideline adaptation, piloting this tool with selected Turkish guidelines, identifying the feasibility of this tool and exploring the needs for adaptation of the tool, drawing recommendations for adaptation of the strategies, and validation of the process by local experts. RESULTS: The study from planning phase to finalizing the guidance, including pilot studies and panel but excluding translation of ADAPTE, lasted 18 months. Nine researchers were involved in the adaptation process and 15 more experts were involved in the validation panel. Following the suggestions of the research team on modifications and validation through the expert panel; 2 steps of the ADAPTE toolkit were rejected, 2 steps were accepted by modification, 7 steps were accepted by additional recommendations. In addition, 2 tools were suggested to be added to the toolkit. CONCLUSION: This is the first study on adaptation of guidelines in Turkey. Pilot adaptation of 2 guidelines with ADAPTE revealed that ADAPTE is a useful and feasible tool in Turkish setting, but might require certain changes in recommendations and revision of tools.

Genomic data into everyday work of a medical practitioner - digital tools for decision-making.

Recent technological development has enabled fast and cost-effective simultaneous analyses of several gene variants or sequence of even the whole genome. For medical practitioners this has created challenges although genomic information may be clinically useful in new applications such as finding out individual risk for diseases influenced by as many as 50,000 variable DNA regions or in detecting pharmacogenetic risks prior to prescribing a medicine. New digital tools have paved the way for utilization of genomic data via easy access and clear clinical interpretation for both doctor and patient. In this review we describe some of these tools and applications for clinical use.

A set of systematic reviews to help reduce inappropriate prescribing to older people: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are common in older people. Assessment tools or lists of criteria aimed at supporting prescription decisions for older people exist, but have often been based on expert opinion with insufficient consideration of the evidence available. The present paper describes the methods we are using to systematically review the existing evidence on the efficacy and safety of the most commonly prescribed drugs for older people in the management of their chronic medical conditions and to develop recommendations to reduce inappropriate prescriptions for incorporation into the Comprehensive Medication Review (CMR) tool developed by the PRIMA-eDS European project. METHODS: We selected the 20 most relevant drugs/drug classes in terms of prescription volumes and risk of hospitalisation for older people and the most relevant indications for the most common chronic conditions among older people and a total of 35 distinct drug-indication pairs were chosen. Based on clinical considerations we collapsed some indications together, reducing the 35 pairs to a final total of 22 separate systematic reviews (SR). A common methodology will be used for each individual SR, based on the methodological manuals of the Cochrane collaboration and the PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews. Our search strategy will have a staged approach where we initially search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, but if relevant reviews are not found, then search for individual studies (controlled intervention and observational studies). Our pilot work and initial scoping of the literature suggested that very few, relevant individual trials or existing systematic reviews have researched or reported exclusively on older people. Therefore, sufficient data might not be available to perform meta-analysis but we will provide a narrative synthesis describing characteristics and findings of included studies. The collected evidence will be used to construct recommendations on when not to use or to discontinue a drug, or when to reduce its dose. Recommendations will be developed in team meetings using the GRADE methodology to reflect the strength of the recommendation and the quality of the evidence. Recommendations will be built into the CMR tool. DISCUSSION: This protocol has been prepared for a series of systematic reviews which will provide research-based evidence to develop recommendations to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy in older people as part of the CMR tool of the PRIMA-eDS project.