Comparative effectiveness of generic commercial versus locally customized clinical decision support tools to reduce prescription of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for patients with heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of 2 clinical decision support (CDS) tools to avoid prescription of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with heart failure (HF): a "commercial" and a locally "customized" alert. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 2 CDS tools implemented within a large integrated health system. The commercial CDS tool was designed according to third-party drug content and EHR vendor specifications. The customized CDS tool underwent a user-centered design process informed by implementation science principles, with input from a cross disciplinary team. The customized CDS tool replaced the commercial CDS tool. Data were collected from the electronic health record via analytic reports and manual chart review. The primary outcome was effectiveness, defined as whether the clinician changed their behavior and did not prescribe an NSAID. RESULTS: A random sample of 366 alerts (183 per CDS tool) was evaluated that represented 355 unique patients. The commercial CDS tool was effective for 7 of 172 (4%) patients, while the customized CDS tool was effective for 81 of 183 (44%) patients. After adjusting for age, chronic kidney disease, ejection fraction, NYHA class, concurrent prescription of an opioid or acetaminophen, visit type (inpatient or outpatient), and clinician specialty, the customized alerts were at 24.3 times greater odds of effectiveness compared to the commercial alerts (OR: 24.3 CI: 10.20-58.06). CONCLUSION: Investing additional resources to customize a CDS tool resulted in a CDS tool that was more effective at reducing the total number of NSAID orders placed for patients with HF compared to a commercially available CDS tool.

Clinician challenges to evidence-based prescribing for heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: A qualitative evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Reasons for suboptimal prescribing for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have been identified, but it is unclear if they remain relevant with recent advances in healthcare delivery and technologies. This study aimed to identify and understand current clinician-perceived challenges to prescribing guideline-directed HFrEF medications. METHODS: We conducted content analysis methodology, including interviews and member-checking focus groups with primary care and cardiology clinicians. Interview guides were informed by the Cabana Framework. RESULTS: We conducted interviews with 33 clinicians (13 cardiology specialists, 22 physicians) and member checking with 10 of these. We identified four levels of challenges from the clinician perspective. Clinician level challenges included misconceptions about guideline recommendations, clinician assumptions (e.g., drug cost or affordability), and clinical inertia. Patient-clinician level challenges included misalignment of priorities and insufficient communication. Clinician-clinician level challenges were primarily between generalists and specialists, including lack of role clarity, competing priorities of providing focused versus holistic care, and contrasting confidence regarding safety of newer drugs. Policy and system/organisation level challenges included insufficient access to timely/reliable patient data, and unintended care gaps for medications without financially incentivized metrics. CONCLUSION: This study presents current challenges faced by cardiology and primary care which can be used to strategically design interventions to improve guideline-directed care for HFrEF. The findings support the persistence of many challenges and also sheds light on new challenges. New challenges identified include conflicting perspectives between generalists and specialists, hesitancy to prescribe newer medications due to safety concerns, and unintended consequences related to value-based reimbursement metrics for select medications.

Assessing Prescriber Behavior with a Clinical Decision Support Tool to Prevent Drug-Induced Long QT Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical decision support (CDS) alerts built into the electronic health record (EHR) have the potential to reduce the risk of drug-induced long QT syndrome (diLQTS) in susceptible patients. However, the degree to which providers incorporate this information into prescription behavior and the impact on patient outcomes is often unknown. METHODS: We examined provider response data over a period from October 8, 2016 until November 8, 2018 for a CDS alert deployed within the EHR from a 13-hospital integrated health care system that fires when a patient with a QTc ≥ 500 ms within the past 14 days is prescribed a known QT-prolonging medication. We used multivariate generalized estimating equations to analyze the impact of therapeutic alternatives, relative risk of diLQTS for specific medications, and patient characteristics on provider response to the CDS and overall patient mortality. RESULTS: The CDS alert fired 15,002 times for 7,510 patients for which the most common response (51.0%) was to override the alert and order the culprit medication. In multivariate models, we found that patient age, relative risk of diLQTS, and presence of alternative agents were significant predictors of adherence to the CDS alerts and that nonadherence itself was a predictor of mortality. Risk of diLQTS and presence of an alternative agent are major factors in provider adherence to a CDS to prevent diLQTS; however, provider nonadherence was associated with a decreased risk of mortality. CONCLUSION: Surrogate endpoints, such as provider adherence, can be useful measures of CDS value but attention to hard outcomes, such as mortality, is likely needed.