Incidental Findings in the Trauma Population: Interdisciplinary Approach and Electronic Medical Record Reminder Association with Pre-Discharge Reporting and Medicolegal Risk.

BACKGROUND: Incidental findings (IFs) are reported in 20% or more of trauma CT scans. In addition to the importance of patient disclosure, there is considerable legal pressure to avoid missed diagnoses. We reported previously that 63.5% of IFs were disclosed before discharge and with 20% were nondisclosed. We initiated a multidisciplinary systemic plan to effect predischarge disclosure by synoptic CT reports with American College of Radiology recommended follow-up, electronic medical records discharge prompts, and provider education. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational series patients from November 2019 to February 2020 were included. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS, version 21 (IBM Corp). RESULTS: Eight hundred and seventy-seven patients underwent 1 or more CT scans for the evaluation of trauma (507 were male and 370 were female). Mean age of the patients was 57 years (range 14 to 99 years) and 96% had blunt injury. In 315 patients, there were 523 IFs (1.7 per patient); the most common were lung (17.5%), kidney (13%), and liver (11%). Radiology report compliance rate was 84% (210 of 249 patients). There were 66 studies from outside facilities. Sixteen IFs were suspicious for malignancy. A total of 151 patients needed no follow-up and 148 patients needed future follow-up evaluation. Predischarge IF disclosure compliance rate was 90.1% (286 patients); 25 were post discharge. Four patients remained undisclosed. Compared with our previous report, clearer reporting and electronic medical records prompts increased predischarge disclosure from 63.5% to 90.1% (p < 0.01, chi-square test) and decreased days to notification from 29.5 (range 0 to 277) to 5.2 (range 0 to 59) (p < 0.01, Mann-Whitney U test). CONCLUSIONS: Timely, complete disclosure of IFs improves patient outcomes and reduces medicolegal risk. Collaboration among trauma, radiology, and information technology promotes improved disclosure in trauma populations.

Electronic Health Record Reminders for Chlamydia Screening in an American Indian Population.

OBJECTIVES: Indian Health Service (IHS) screening rates for Chlamydia trachomatis are lower than national rates of chlamydia screening in the Southwest. We describe and evaluate the effect of a public health intervention consisting of electronic health record (EHR) reminders to alert health care providers to screen for chlamydia at an IHS facility. We also conducted an awareness presentation among health care providers on chlamydia screening. METHODS: We conducted our intervention from November 1, 2013, through October 31, 2015, at an IHS facility in the Southwest. We implemented algorithms that queried database values to assess chlamydia screening performance in 6 clinical departments. We presented data on the screening performance of clinical departments and health care providers (de-identified) in the awareness presentations. We re-queried database values 1 and 2 years after implementation of the EHR reminder intervention to evaluate before-and-after screening rates, comparing data among all patients and among female patients only. RESULTS: We found small, sustained relative increases in chlamydia screening rates during the 2012-2015 evaluation period: 20.8% pre-intervention to 24.9% and 24.2% one and two years postintervention, respectively, across all patients; 32.3% preintervention to 36.6% and 35.6% one and two years postintervention, respectively, among female patients. Increases in clinical department-specific screening rates varied and were most prominent in internal medicine (35.8% preintervention to peak 65.8% postintervention). The 1 clinic (obstetrics-gynecology) that did not receive an awareness presentation showed a consistent downward trend in screening rates, although absolute rates were consistently higher in that clinic than in other clinics. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness presentations that offer feedback to health care providers on screening performance, heighten provider awareness of the importance of chlamydia screening, and promote development of novel provider-initiated screening protocols may help to increase screening rates when combined with EHR reminders.

Evaluation of a High-risk Patient Reminder System for Colonoscopy Surveillance.

Objectives: In this paper we report the evaluation of a proprietary recall system for promoting compliance with recommended follow-up in high-risk patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review for patients of an active private colon and rectal surgery practice having colonoscopy in 2006. Patients selected were <80 years of age and assessed to be high-risk by findings at exam or personal/family history of colorectal neoplasm with a recommendation for follow-up surveillance colonoscopy ranging from months to 5 years. Up to 6 months from recommendation was considered to be within compliance. Results: A total of 795 patients met the inclusion criteria, with average age of 63.2 years, 422 (53.1%) being men. Compliance with surveillance colonoscopy recommendations was 62.5%. The recall system impacted patient behavior with compliant patients being sent a median of one letter (average, 1.5) and late or no follow-up patients being sent a median of 4 letters (average, 3.9). Conclusions: Multiple contacts with patients are required to improve compliance with surveillance. Our findings support at least 4 to 5 efforts to remind patients of the importance to schedule a colonoscopy is necessary to optimize compliance.

A Mobile Health Intervention for Prostate Biopsy Patients Reduces Appointment Cancellations: Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate patient education and preparation for office-based procedures often leads to delayed care, poor patient satisfaction, and increased costs to the health care system. We developed and deployed a mobile health (mHealth) reminder and education program for patients scheduled for transrectal prostate biopsy. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the impact of an mHealth reminder and education program on appointment cancellation rates, communication frequency, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: We developed a text message (SMS, short message service)-based program with seven reminders containing links to Web-based content and surveys sent over an 18-day period (14 days before through 3 days after prostate biopsy). Messages contained educational content, reminders, and readiness questionnaires. Demographic information, appointment cancellations or change data, and patient/provider communication events were collected for 6 months before and after launching the intervention. Patient satisfaction was evaluated in the postintervention cohort. RESULTS: The preintervention (n=473) and postintervention (n=359) cohorts were composed of men of similar median age and racial/ethnic distribution living a similar distance from clinic. The postintervention cohort had significantly fewer canceled or rescheduled appointments (33.8% vs 21.2%, P<.001) and fewer same-day cancellations (3.8% vs 0.5%, P<.001). There was a significant increase in preprocedural telephone calls (0.6 vs 0.8 calls per patient, P=.02) in the postintervention cohort, but not a detectable change in postprocedural calls. The mean satisfaction with the program was 4.5 out of 5 (SD 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: An mHealth periprocedural outreach program significantly lowered appointment cancellation and rescheduling and was associated with high patient satisfaction scores with a slight increase in preprocedural telephone calls. This led to fewer underused procedure appointments and high patient satisfaction.

Utilization of computerized clinical decision support for potentially inappropriate medications.

Background: Electronic medical record (EMR) alerts may inform point of care decisions, including the decision to prescribe potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) identified in the Beers criteria. EMR alerts may not be considered relevant or informative in the clinician context, leading to a phenomenon colloquially known as "alert fatigue." Objective: To assess the frequency of clinical interaction with EMR alerts and associated deprescribing behaviors in ambulatory settings. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study in two ambulatory clinics (the Kaye Edmonton Clinic Senior's Clinic and the Lynnwood Family Practice Clinic) in Edmonton over an observational period of 30 months. Statistical analysis was done using descriptive statistics, chi-square and regression analysis. Results: The reminder performance for interactions with the alert was 17.2% across the two clinics. The Number Needed to Remind (NNR) or mean number of alerts shown on clinician screens prior to a single interaction of any kind with the alert was 5.8. When actions were defined as a deprescribing (ie discontinuation) event that was related to the alert and that particular interaction in the EMR, the reminder performance was 1.2%, for an NNR of 82.8. Conclusion: The configuration of alerts in the EMR was not associated with a clinically detectable increase in the uptake of the Beers criteria for high hazard medications.

Randomized controlled comparison of cross-sectional survey approaches to optimize follow-up completeness in clinical studies.

INTRODUCTION: In outcome research, incomplete follow-up is a major, yet potentially correctable source of bias. Cross-sectional surveys may theoretically increase completeness of follow-up, but low response rates are reported typically. We investigated whether a pre-notification letter improved patient availability for follow-up phone interviews and thereby improved cross-sectional survey yield. METHODS: A consecutive series of vascular patients was randomly divided into a trial and a validation population. The trial population was then randomized 1:1 to one of two cross-sectional contact strategies: Strategy 1 consisted of direct contact attempts by up to 12 systematically timed phone calls, whereas Strategy 2 used a personalized pre-notification letter to arrange for scheduled phone call interviews. Response rates, average time and efforts needed per patient and overall survey duration were compared. Subsequently, trial findings were externally validated in the validation population. RESULTS: Of 728 consecutive patients, 370 were allocated to the trial population. Trial patients contacted by strategy 1 (n = 183) had a similar profile when compared to trial patients contacted by strategy 2 (n = 187). Follow-up periods following surgery (54.3 versus 53.6 months) and all-cause mortality rates (21.3% versus 18.7%) were comparable between the trial groups. Cross-sectional information on survival outcomes was almost complete after both contact strategies (99.5% versus 98.9%, P = 1.0). In 144/187 strategy 2 patients (77%) interviews were scheduled successfully necessitating significantly less contact attempts (median of 1.3 versus 2.3 per patient, P<0.0001). However, invested time per patient was similar between the groups (median of 10.1 versus 9.6 minutes), and survey strategy 1 completed earlier (median time to contact 4 versus 11 days, P<0.0001). Therefore, strategy 1 was validated in the validation population (n = 358): a low lost to follow-up rate below 1% (P = 1.0) was reconfirmed necessitating an average of 2.3 contact attempts per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Both contact strategies were equally successful in contacting almost all patients cross-sectionally. If systematically timed, direct phone calls were less complicated to organize and faster completed. Given the low time and effort per patient, outcome studies should invest in systematic follow-up surveys to minimize attrition bias.

Competing needs: a qualitative study of cervical cancer screening attendance among HPV-positive women in Tanzania.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to understand causes of attendance and non-attendance to a follow-up cervical cancer screening among human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive women. DESIGN: Semistructured, individual interviews with HPV-positive women and cervical cancer screening nurses. The interview guide and initial data analysis were guided by existing health behaviour theories. However, as the theories limited the potential of the data material, a grounded theory framework guided the final data analysis. SETTING: Interviews were conducted in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, at Ocean Road Cancer Institute (ORCI) or in the homes of screening clients. PARTICIPANTS: 15 interviews were conducted with women who had tested HPV-positive during a patient-initiated screening and been appointed for a follow-up screening 14 months later. Nine women had not attended the follow-up appointment, four had delayed attendance and two had attended on the scheduled date. Further, individual interviews were conducted with the two nurses working at ORCI's screening clinic. RESULTS: Perceived benefits for attending a patient-initiated screening include treatment of gynaecological symptoms and prevention of disease. The key perceived benefit of a health provider-initiated follow-up screening is prevention, which is challenged by the circumstance that it is seen by women as having merely potential benefit and therefore can be postponed when competing needs are present. Perceived challenges for screening attendance include emotional costs, in the form of fear of the disease, fear of the gynaecological examination as well as direct and indirect economic costs, such as transportation costs, lost income and waiting time. CONCLUSION: Cervical cancer screening is one among many tasks that women living in a low-income setting must attend to. Since health provider-initiated follow-up screening is seen as having only potential benefit, attendance can be postponed when competing needs exist. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02509702.

Repeated Automated Mobile Text Messaging Reminders for Follow-Up of Positive Fecal Occult Blood Tests: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs) are recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force as a screening method for colorectal cancer (CRC), but they are only effective if positive results are followed by colonoscopy. Surprisingly, a large proportion of patients with a positive result do not follow this recommendation. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of text messaging (short message service, SMS) in increasing adherence to colonoscopy follow-up after a positive FOBT result. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted with patients who had positive CRC screening results. Randomization was stratified by residential district and socioeconomic status (SES). Subjects in the control group (n=238) received routine care that included an alert to the physician regarding the positive FOBT result. The intervention group (n=232) received routine care and 3 text messaging SMS reminders to visit their primary care physician. Adherence to colonoscopy was measured 120 days from the positive result. All patient information, including test results and colonoscopy completion, were obtained from their electronic medical records. Physicians of study patients completed an attitude survey regarding FOBT as a screening test for CRC. Intervention and control group variables (dependent and independent) were compared using chi-square test. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for performing colonoscopy within 120 days for the intervention group compared with the control group while adjusting for potential confounders including age, gender, SES, district, ethnicity, and physicians' attitude. RESULTS: Overall, 163 of the 232 patients in the intervention group and 112 of the 238 patients in the control group underwent colonoscopy within 120 days of the positive FOBT results (70.3% vs 47.1%; OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.49-3.17; P<.001); this association remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders (P=.001). CONCLUSIONS: A text message (SMS) reminder is an effective, simple, and inexpensive method for improving adherence among patients with positive colorectal screening results. This type of intervention could also be evaluated for other types of screening tests. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03642652; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03642652 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/74TlICijl).

Better Ask Than Tell: Responses to mHealth Interrogative Reminders and Associations With Colorectal Cancer Screening Subsequent Uptake in a Prospective Cohort Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Text message (short message service, SMS) interrogative reminders were adopted in population screening for the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine responses to text message (SMS) reminders and associate responses with senders' characteristics, message type (interrogative/declarative), and subsequent screening uptake. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort intervention. Text message (SMS) reminders to undergo CRC screening, randomized into interrogative and declarative phrasing, were sent to nonadherent 40,000 women and men (age 50-74 years) at CRC average risk. We analyzed recipient responses by message phrasing, recipient characteristics, and for content, the latter predicting subsequent CRC screening per program database. RESULTS: While interrogative text message (SMS) reminders elicited 7.67% (1475/19,227) responses, declarative ones elicited 0.76% (146/19,262) responses. Text message (SMS) responses were content analyzed and grouped into attitudes toward CRC screening (1237/1512, 81.8% positive) and intention to screen (1004/1512, 62.6%). Text message (SMS) respondents screened significantly more than nonrespondents after 6 months (415/1621, 25.6% vs 3322/36,868, 9.0%; χ12=487.5, P<.001); 1 year (340/1621, 21.0% vs 4711/36,868; χ12=91.5, P<.001); and 2 years (225/1621, 13.9% vs 3924/36,868; χ12=16.9, P<.001) following the reminders. In a multivariable logistic regression among text message (SMS) respondents, screening after 6 months was significantly predicted by older age, past sporadic screening, attitudes, and intentions. CONCLUSIONS: Interrogative text message (SMS) reminders reached previously uninvolved sectors in the CRC target population-men, sporadic-screenees, and the "never-tested" before. This novel application resulted in a population-level, incrementally enhanced screening. Asking patients about their future health behavior may be relevant for enhancing other health behaviors in preventive medicine and clinical settings.

Evaluation of a Patient-Care Planning Intervention to Improve Appointment Attendance by Adults After Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Bariatric surgery is recognized as a durable treatment for severe obesity; however, high rates of nonattendance and patient engagement during the postoperative period remain challenges. This pre/post study evaluates a quality-improvement initiative to improve attendance at bariatric surgery program appointments and to heighten program efficiency, as measured by appointment attendance, cancellations and new assessments. METHODS: Patients and staff were consulted in order to identify causes for patient attrition after surgery. The ideas for change that were implemented were advance care-planning calls and e-mails in order to tailor appointments to patients' needs and an online application of follow-up care information. Online surveys were used to assess patient satisfaction. After several plan-do-study-act cycles, appointment attendance rates for 5,676 appointments between April 1, 2014, and May 29, 2015, were compared pre- and post-quality improvement intervention. For the intervention, 1,294 patients were called, representing 4,124 appointments. Both preoperative and postoperative attendance rates and costs were examined. RESULTS: Although postoperative attendance and no-show rates changed by only 1.8% postintervention, advance cancellations increased by 6%; indications of special-cause variation were attributable to the intervention. With advance cancellations increasing, time was available for preoperative and nonroutine postoperative appointments, refilling 6.6 appointments per week. As a result, cost savings were $21,251 based on unused clinician time. The contact rate of patients was 45%, and patient satisfaction was high. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, this quality-improvement intervention was able to improve patient-centred care and clinic efficiency through the use of advance-care planning as evaluated by appointment attendance data and patient satisfaction surveys.

Evaluation of patient-focused interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening among new york state medicaid managed care patients.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate an ongoing initiative to improve colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake in the New York State (NYS) Medicaid managed care population. METHODS: Patients aged 50 to 75 years who were not up to date with CRC screening and resided in 2 NYS regions were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 cohorts: no mailed reminder, mailed reminder, and mailed reminder + incentive (in the form of a $25 cash card). Screening prevalence and the costs of the intervention were summarized. RESULTS: In total, 7123 individuals in the Adirondack Region and 10,943 in the Central Region (including the Syracuse metropolitan area) were included. Screening prevalence in the Adirondack Region was 7.2% in the mailed reminder + incentive cohort, 7.0% in the mailed reminder cohort, and 5.8% in the no mailed reminder cohort. In the Central Region, screening prevalence was 7.2% in the mailed reminder cohort, 6.9% in the mailed reminder + incentive cohort, and 6.5% in the no mailed reminder cohort. The cost of implementing interventions in the Central Region was approximately 53% lower than in the Adirondack Region. CONCLUSIONS: Screening uptake was low and did not differ significantly across the 2 regions or within the 3 cohorts. The incentive payment and mailed reminder did not appear to be effective in increasing CRC screening. The total cost of implementation was lower in the Central Region because of efficiencies generated from lessons learned during the first round of implementation in the Adirondack Region. More varied multicomponent interventions may be required to facilitate the completion of CRC screening among Medicaid beneficiaries.

Colorectal cancer screening interventions in 2 health care systems serving disadvantaged populations: Screening uptake and cost-effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of the current study were to assess changes in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake and the cost-effectiveness of implementing multiple evidence-based interventions (EBIs). EBIs were implemented at 2 federally qualified health centers that participated in the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's Clinic Quality Improvement for Population Health initiative. METHODS: Interventions included patient and provider reminder systems (health system 1), provider assessment and feedback (health systems 1 and 2), and numerous support activities (health systems 1 and 2). The authors evaluated health system 1 from July 2013 to June 2015 and health system 2 from July 2014 to June 2017. Evaluation measures included annual CRC screening uptake, EBIs implemented, funds received and expended by each health system to implement EBIs, and intervention costs to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and health systems. RESULTS: CRC screening uptake increased by 18 percentage points in health system 1 and 10 percentage points in health system 2. The improvements in CRC screening uptake, not including the cost of the screening tests, were obtained at an added cost ranging from $24 to $29 per person screened. CONCLUSIONS: In both health systems, the multicomponent interventions implemented likely resulted in improvements in CRC screening. The results suggest that significant increases in CRC screening uptake can be achieved in federally qualified health centers when appropriate technical support and health system commitment are present. The cost estimates of the multicomponent interventions suggest that these interventions and support activities can be implemented in a cost-effective manner.

Effect of Reminding Patients to Complete Fecal Immunochemical Testing: A Comparative Effectiveness Study of Automated and Live Approaches.

BACKGROUND: The Community Preventive Services Task Force recommends multi-component interventions, including patient reminders, to improve uptake of colorectal cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the effectiveness of different forms of reminders for a direct-mail fecal immunochemical test (FIT) program. DESIGN: Patient-randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: 2772 adults aged 50-75, not up to date with colorectal cancer screening recommendations, with a clinic visit in the previous year at any of four participating health center clinics. INTERVENTION: Participants were mailed an introductory letter and FIT. Those who did not complete their FIT within 3 weeks were randomized to receive (1) a reminder letter, (2) two automated phone calls, (3) two text messages, (4) a live phone call, (5) a reminder letter and a live phone call, (6) two automated phone calls and a live phone call, or (7) two text messages and a live phone call. Patients with a patient portal account were sent two email reminders, but were not randomized. MAIN MEASURES: FIT return rates for each group, 6 months following randomization. KEY RESULTS: A total of 255 (10%) participants returned their FIT within 3 weeks of the mailing. Among randomized participants (n = 2010), an additional 25.5% returned their FITs after reminders were delivered (estimated overall return rate = 32.7%). In intention-to-treat analysis, compared to the group allocated to receive a reminder letter, return rates were higher for the group assigned to receive the live phone call (OR = 1.51 [1.03-2.21]) and lower for the group assigned to receive text messages (OR = 0.66 [0.43-0.99]). Reminder effectiveness differed by language preference. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that FIT reminders that included a live call were more effective than reminders that relied solely on written communication (a text message or letter). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov/ctc2/show/NCT01742065 .

The challenge of liver cancer surveillance in general practice: Do recall and reminder systems hold the answer?

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance reduces mortality in at-risk people living with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), but is difficult to achieve in practice. The objective of this study was to measure participation and adherence to liver cancer HCC surveillance in eligible patients in a community health centre, following support from the Integrated Hepatitis B Service (IHBS). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients with CHB who met the indications for HCC surveillance over a 4.5-year period of IHBS involvement was conducted. Data collected included the date of ultrasound examinations and HBV DNA viral load tests. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients underwent HCC surveillance, representing 213 person years. The participation rate was 75%. Adherence to surveillance was considered good in 18 (27%) patients, suboptimal in 29 (43%) patients and poor in 20 (30%) patients. A greater proportion of patients were receiving HCC surveillance at the final audit (56%) than at baseline (10%; P DISCUSSION: It is difficult to achieve optimal adherence to HCC surveillance, even with additional support.

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting them to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system (computer-generated) and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on quality of care (outcomes related to healthcare professionals' practice) and patient outcomes (outcomes related to patients' health condition). SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases and two trials registers up to 21 September 2016 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included individual- or cluster-randomized and non-randomized trials that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone (single-component intervention) or in addition to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention), compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median improvement and interquartile range (IQR) across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 35 studies (30 randomized trials and five non-randomized trials) and analyzed 34 studies (40 comparisons). Twenty-nine studies took place in the USA and six studies took place in Canada, France, Israel, and Kenya. All studies except two took place in outpatient care. Reminders were aimed at enhancing compliance with preventive guidelines (e.g. cancer screening tests, vaccination) in half the studies and at enhancing compliance with disease management guidelines for acute or chronic conditions (e.g. annual follow-ups, laboratory tests, medication adjustment, counseling) in the other half.Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), probably improves quality of care slightly compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 6.8% (IQR: 3.8% to 17.5%); 34 studies (40 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals alone (single-component intervention) probably improves quality of care compared with usual care (median improvement 11.0% (IQR 5.4% to 20.0%); 27 studies (27 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence). Adding computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention) probably improves quality of care slightly compared with the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 4.0% (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%); 11 studies (13 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).We are uncertain whether reminders, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), improve patient outcomes as the certainty of the evidence is very low (n = 6 studies (seven comparisons)). None of the included studies reported outcomes related to harms or adverse effects of the intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate-certainty evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals probably slightly improves quality of care, in terms of compliance with preventive guidelines and compliance with disease management guidelines. It is uncertain whether reminders improve patient outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is very low. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can probably improve quality of care in various settings under various conditions.

A centralized mailed program with stepped increases of support increases time in compliance with colorectal cancer screening guidelines over 5 years: A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Screening over many years is required to optimize reductions in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality. However, no prior trials have compared strategies for obtaining long-term adherence. METHODS: Systems of Support to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up was implemented in an integrated health care organization in Washington State. Between 2008 and 2009, 4675 individuals aged 50 to 74 years were randomized to receive the usual care (UC), which included clinic-based strategies to increase CRC screening (arm 1), or, in years 1 and 2, mailings with a call-in number for colonoscopy and mailed fecal tests (arm 2), mailings plus brief telephone assistance (arm 3), or mailings and assistance plus nurse navigation (arm 4). Active-intervention subjects (those in arms 2, 3, and 4 combined) who were still eligible for CRC screening were randomized to mailings being stopped or continued in years 3 and 5. The time in compliance with CRC screening over 5 years was compared for persons assigned to any intervention and persons assigned to UC. Screening tests contributed time on the basis of national guidelines for screening intervals (fecal tests annually, sigmoidoscopy every 5 years, and colonoscopy every 10 years). RESULTS: All participants contributed data, but they were censored at disenrollment, death, the age of 76 years, or a diagnosis of CRC. Compared with UC participants, intervention participants had 31% more adjusted covered time over 5 years (incidence rate ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-1.37; covered time, 47.5% vs 62.1%). Fecal testing accounted for almost all additional covered time. CONCLUSIONS: In a health care organization with clinic-based activities to increase CRC screening, a centralized program led to increased CRC screening adherence over 5 years. Longer term data on screening adherence and its impact on CRC outcomes are needed. Cancer 2017;123:4472-80. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Improving Utilization of Clinical Decision Support Systems by Reducing Alert Fatigue: Strategies and Recommendations.

Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are designed to help making clinical decisions regarding the management of patients. CDS alerts can save lives but frequent insignificant ones might cause alert fatigue. Studies discuss that 33% to 96% of clinical alerts are ignored. We categorized best evidence based strategies, to reduce alert fatigue and improve CDSS utilization, into five major areas. Classify alerts in to three main levels; severe, moderate and minor then develop a core set of critical drug to drug interactions. Classify alerts into active and passive groups, where only critical alerts should be interruptive actively while less critical alerts should be non-interruptive to the user. Conduct regular user training on new improvements. Keep monitoring alert response rates and keep ongoing research and improvement efforts. Provide systems with automated feedback and learning mechanisms where frequently ignored and justified alerts could be moved automatically from the active interruptive to the passive non-interruptive model.

A randomized intervention study to evaluate whether electronic messaging can increase human papillomavirus vaccine completion and knowledge among college students.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an intervention aimed at increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine completion of the 3-dose series and knowledge. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred sixty-four male and female US college students 18-26 years old who were receiving HPV vaccine dose 1. METHODS: Students were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. Intervention participants received the electronic intervention (text/e-mail appointment reminders and education messages) and controls received standard-of-care. Baseline/follow-up survey data were collected. Main outcome measures included vaccine completion and knowledge. RESULTS: HPV vaccine completion across groups were not significantly different for HPV dose 2 (53% vs 52%) and dose 3 (34% vs 32%). Mean knowledge score at follow-up for intervention group was significantly higher (p = .01) than at baseline. No significant differences in knowledge were found for the control group. The biggest predictor of HPV vaccine completion was female gender. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention increased knowledge but not vaccine completion. More research with catch-up age populations is needed.

Effects of computer reminders on complications of peripheral venous catheters and nurses' adherence to a guideline in paediatric care--a cluster randomised study.

BACKGROUND: Reminder systems in electronic patient records (EPR) have proven to affect both health care professionals' behaviour and patient outcomes. The aim of this cluster randomised trial was to investigate the effects of implementing a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) in paediatric care in the format of reminders integrated in the EPRs, on PVC-related complications, and on registered nurses' (RNs') self-reported adherence to the guideline. An additional aim was to study the relationship between contextual factors and the outcomes of the intervention. METHODS: The study involved 12 inpatient units at a paediatric university hospital. The reminders included choice of PVC, hygiene, maintenance, and daily inspection of PVC site. Primary outcome was documented signs and symptoms of PVC-related complications at removal, retrieved from the EPR. Secondary outcome was RNs' adherence to a PVC guideline, collected through a questionnaire that also included RNs' perceived work context, as measured by the Alberta Context Tool. Units were allocated into two strata, based on occurrence of PVCs. A blinded simple draw of lots from each stratum randomised six units to the control and intervention groups, respectively. Units were not blinded. The intervention group included 626 PVCs at baseline and 618 post-intervention and the control group 724 PVCs at baseline and 674 post-intervention. RNs included at baseline were 212 (65.4 %) and 208 (71.5 %) post-intervention. RESULTS: No significant effect was found for the computer reminders on PVC-related complications nor on RNs' adherence to the guideline recommendations. The complication rate at baseline and post-intervention was 40.6 % (95 % confidence interval (CI) 36.7-44.5) and 41.9 % (95 % CI 38.0-45.8), for the intervention group and 40.3 % (95 % CI 36.8-44.0) and 46.9 % (95 % CI 43.1-50.7) for the control. In general, RNs' self-rated work context varied from moderately low to moderately high, indicating that conditions for a successful implementation to occur were less optimal. CONCLUSIONS: The reminders might have benefitted from being accompanied by a tailored intervention that targeted specific barriers, such as the low frequency of recorded reasons for removal, the low adherence to daily inspection of PVC sites, and the lack of regular feedback to the RNs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN44819426.

Impact of Healthcare Information Technology on Nursing Practice.

PURPOSE: To report additional mediation findings from a descriptive cross sectional study to examine if nurses' perceptions of the impact of healthcare information technology on their practice mediates the relationship between electronic nursing care reminder use and missed nursing care. DESIGN: The study used a descriptive design. The sample (N = 165) was composed of registered nurses working on acute care hospital units. The sample was obtained from a large teaching hospital in Southeast Michigan in the fall of 2012. All eligible nursing units (n = 19) were included. METHODS: The MISSCARE Survey, Nursing Care Reminders Usage Survey, and the Impact of Healthcare Information Technology Scale were used to collect data to test for mediation. Mediation was tested using the method described by Baron and Kenny. Multiple regression equations were used to analyze the data to determine if mediation occurred between the variables. FINDINGS: Missed nursing care, the outcome variable, was regressed on the predictor variable, reminder usage, and the mediator variable impact of technology on nursing practice. The impact of healthcare information technology (IHIT) on nursing practice negatively affected missed nursing care (t = -4.12, p < .001), explaining 9.8% of variance in missed nursing care. With IHIT present, the predictor (reminder usage) was no longer significant (t = -.70, p = .48). Thus, the reduced direct association between reminder usage and missed nursing care when IHIT was in the model supported the hypothesis that IHIT was at least one of the mediators in the relationship between reminder usage and missed nursing care. CONCLUSIONS: The perceptions of the impact of healthcare information technology mediates the relationship between nursing care reminder use and missed nursing care. The findings are beneficial to the advancement of healthcare technology in that designers of healthcare information technology systems need to keep in mind that perceptions regarding impacts of the technology will influence usage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Many times, information technology systems are not designed to match the workflow of nurses. Systems built with redundant or impertinent reminders may be ignored. System designers must study which reminders nurses find most useful and which reminders result in the best quality outcomes.