Michael D Ahearn1, Stephen J Kerr. 1. National Prescribing Service, Level 1, 31 Buckingham Street, Surry Hills, NSW 2010, Australia. mahearn@nps.org.au
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore how Australian general practitioners use pharmaceutical decision-support (PDS) systems; to determine GPs' perceptions of the deficiencies and strengths of these systems; and how they believe they can be improved. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative analysis of discussion from three focus groups of GPs (from one rural and two urban Divisions of General Practice) between April and May 2002. PARTICIPANTS: 22 GPs selected to include users of the five most popular prescribing/clinical practice software products available in Australia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Advantages and disadvantages of using PDS software; ideas for improving PDS systems; attitudes to electronic evidence-based guidelines. RESULTS: GPs believed that important interactions may be missed because of desensitisation resulting from too many alerts (which also intrude on workflow); that interaction alerts need to be severity graded and only significant ones should appear; and that improved computer-user interface design could enhance the usefulness of PDS systems. CONCLUSIONS: Our results will provide useful feedback to government, software vendors and software developers on the needs and expectations of end users and on the development of agreed software standards.
OBJECTIVES: To explore how Australian general practitioners use pharmaceutical decision-support (PDS) systems; to determine GPs' perceptions of the deficiencies and strengths of these systems; and how they believe they can be improved. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative analysis of discussion from three focus groups of GPs (from one rural and two urban Divisions of General Practice) between April and May 2002. PARTICIPANTS: 22 GPs selected to include users of the five most popular prescribing/clinical practice software products available in Australia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Advantages and disadvantages of using PDS software; ideas for improving PDS systems; attitudes to electronic evidence-based guidelines. RESULTS: GPs believed that important interactions may be missed because of desensitisation resulting from too many alerts (which also intrude on workflow); that interaction alerts need to be severity graded and only significant ones should appear; and that improved computer-user interface design could enhance the usefulness of PDS systems. CONCLUSIONS: Our results will provide useful feedback to government, software vendors and software developers on the needs and expectations of end users and on the development of agreed software standards.
Authors: Gregory P T Scott; Priya Shah; Jeremy C Wyatt; Boikanyo Makubate; Frank W Cross Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-08-11 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Nidhi R Shah; Andrew C Seger; Diane L Seger; Julie M Fiskio; Gilad J Kuperman; Barry Blumenfeld; Elaine G Recklet; David W Bates; Tejal K Gandhi Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2005-10-12 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Ylva Böttiger; Kari Laine; Marine L Andersson; Tuomas Korhonen; Björn Molin; Marie-Louise Ovesjö; Tuire Tirkkonen; Anders Rane; Lars L Gustafsson; Birgit Eiermann Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2009-02-11 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Annette Moxey; Jane Robertson; David Newby; Isla Hains; Margaret Williamson; Sallie-Anne Pearson Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Melissa T Baysari; Johanna I Westbrook; Katrina L Richardson; Richard O Day Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Saul N Weingart; Andrew C Seger; Nicholas Feola; James Heffernan; Gordon Schiff; Thomas Isaac Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2011-07-01 Impact factor: 5.606