Effect of Clinical Decision Support on Appropriateness of Advanced Imaging Use Among Physicians-in-Training.
Decision Support Systems, Clinical
Formative Feedback
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
/ statistics & numerical data
Medical Order Entry Systems
Medical Staff, Hospital
/ statistics & numerical data
Middle Aged
Practice Patterns, Physicians'
/ statistics & numerical data
Retrospective Studies
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
/ statistics & numerical data
appropriateness
clinical decision support
house staff
overutilization
radiology
Journal
AJR. American journal of roentgenology
ISSN: 1546-3141
Titre abrégé: AJR Am J Roentgenol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7708173
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2019
04 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
20
2
2019
medline:
31
12
2019
entrez:
20
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Clinical decision support (CDS) tools have been shown to reduce inappropriate imaging orders. We hypothesized that CDS may be especially effective for house staff physicians who are prone to overuse of resources. Our hospital implemented CDS for CT and MRI orders in the emergency department with scores based on the American College of Radiology's Appropriateness Criteria (range, 1-9; higher scores represent more-appropriate orders). Data on CT and MRI orders from April 2013 through June 2016 were categorized as pre-CDS or baseline, post-CDS period 1 (i.e., intervention with active feedback for scores of ≤ 4), and post-CDS period 2 (i.e., intervention with active feedback for scores of ≤ 6). Segmented regression analysis with interrupted time series data estimated changes in scores stratified by house staff and non-house staff. Generalized linear models further estimated the modifying effect of the house staff variable. Mean scores were 6.2, 6.2, and 6.7 in the pre-CDS, post-CDS 1, and post-CDS 2 periods, respectively (p < 0.05). In the segmented regression analysis, mean scores significantly (p < 0.05) increased when comparing pre-CDS versus post-CDS 2 periods for both house staff (baseline increase, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.17-0.64) and non-house staff (baseline increase, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.34-0.81), showing no differences in effect between the cohorts. The generalized linear model showed significantly higher scores, particularly in the post-CDS 2 period compared with the pre-CDS period (0.44 increase in scores; p < 0.05). The house staff variable did not significantly change estimates in the post-CDS 2 period. Implementation of active CDS increased overall scores of CT and MRI orders. However, there was no significant difference in effect on scores between house staff and non-house staff.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30779671
doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.19931
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM