A novel, evidence-based, comprehensive clinical decision support system improves outcomes for patients with traumatic rib fractures.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic rib fractures are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have been shown to improve adherence to evidence-based (EB) practice and improve clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to investigate if a rib fracture CDSS reduced hospital length of stay (LOS), 90-day and 1-year mortality, unplanned ICU transfer, and the need for mechanical ventilation. The independent association of two process measures, an admission EB order set and a pain-inspiratory-cough score early warning system, with LOS were investigated. METHODS: The CDSS was scaled across nine US trauma centers. Following multiple imputation, multivariable regression models were fit to evaluate the association of the CDSS on primary and secondary outcomes. As a sensitivity analysis, propensity score matching was also performed to confirm regression findings. RESULTS: Overall, 3,279 patients met inclusion criteria. Rates of EB practices increased following implementation. On risk-adjusted analysis, in-hospital LOS preintervention versus postintervention was unchanged (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-1.15, p = 0.2) but unplanned transfer to the ICU was reduced (odds ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.09-0.84, p = 0.024), as was 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.89, p = 0.01). Provider utilization of the admission order bundle was 45.3%. Utilization was associated with significantly reduced LOS (IRR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.98; p = 0.019). The early warning system triggered on 34.4% of patients; however, was not associated with a significant reduction in hospital LOS (IRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.55-1.06; p = 0.1). CONCLUSION: A novel, user-centered, comprehensive CDSS improves adherence to EB practice and is associated with a significant reduction in unplanned ICU admissions and possibly mortality, but not hospital LOS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Combined Expert and User-Driven Usability Assessment of Trauma Decision Support Systems Improves User-Centered Design.

BACKGROUND: Trauma clinical decision support systems improve adherence with evidence-based practice but suffer from poor usability and the lack of a user-centered design. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of user and expert-driven usability testing methods to detect usability issues in a rib fracture clinical decision support system and identify guiding principles for trauma clinical decision support systems. METHODS: A user-driven and expert-driven usability investigation was conducted using a clinical decision support system developed for patients with rib fractures. The user-driven usability evaluation was as follows: 10 clinicians were selected for simulation-based usability testing using snowball sampling, and each clinician completed 3 simulations using a video-conferencing platform. End-users participated in a novel team-based approach that simulated realistic clinical workflows. The expert-driven heuristic evaluation was as follows: 2 usability experts conducted a heuristic evaluation of the clinical decision support system using 10 common usability heuristics. Usability issues were identified, cataloged, and ranked for severity using a 4-level ordinal scale. Thematic analysis was utilized to categorize the identified usability issues. RESULTS: Seventy-nine usability issues were identified; 63% were identified by experts and 48% by end-users. Notably, 58% of severe usability issues were identified by experts alone. Only 11% of issues were identified by both methods. Five themes were identified that could guide the design of clinical decision support systems-transparency, functionality and integration into workflow, automated and noninterruptive, flexibility, and layout and appearance. Themes were preferentially identified by different methods. CONCLUSION: We found that a dual-method usability evaluation involving usability experts and end-users drastically improved detection of usability issues over single-method alone. We identified 5 themes to guide trauma clinical decision support system design. Performing usability testing via a remote video-conferencing platform facilitated multi-site involvement despite a global pandemic.