BACKGROUND: The term "clinical inertia" is used to describe the failure to manage a chronic condition aggressively enough to bring it under control. The underlying mechanisms for clinical inertia remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To describe one potential mechanism for clinical inertia, seen through the lens of clinician responses to a computerized hypertension reminder. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 509 hypertensive patients from 2 primary care clinics in urban Veterans Health Administration (VA) Medical Centers. All patients had elevated blood pressure (BP) values that triggered a computerized reminder. Given a set of possible responses to the reminder, clinicians asserted at least once for each patient that medication adjustments were unnecessary because the BP was "usually well controlled". MEASUREMENTS: Using recent BP values from the electronic medical record, we assessed the accuracy of this assertion. RESULTS: In most instances (57%), recent BP values were not well controlled, with the systolic BP (56%) much more likely to be elevated than the diastolic BP (13%). Eighteen percent of recent systolic BP values were 160 mmHg or greater. CONCLUSIONS: When clinicians asserted that the BP was "usually well controlled", objective evidence frequently suggested otherwise. This observation provides insight into one potential mechanism underlying clinical inertia.
BACKGROUND: The term "clinical inertia" is used to describe the failure to manage a chronic condition aggressively enough to bring it under control. The underlying mechanisms for clinical inertia remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To describe one potential mechanism for clinical inertia, seen through the lens of clinician responses to a computerized hypertension reminder. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 509 hypertensivepatients from 2 primary care clinics in urban Veterans Health Administration (VA) Medical Centers. All patients had elevated blood pressure (BP) values that triggered a computerized reminder. Given a set of possible responses to the reminder, clinicians asserted at least once for each patient that medication adjustments were unnecessary because the BP was "usually well controlled". MEASUREMENTS: Using recent BP values from the electronic medical record, we assessed the accuracy of this assertion. RESULTS: In most instances (57%), recent BP values were not well controlled, with the systolic BP (56%) much more likely to be elevated than the diastolic BP (13%). Eighteen percent of recent systolic BP values were 160 mmHg or greater. CONCLUSIONS: When clinicians asserted that the BP was "usually well controlled", objective evidence frequently suggested otherwise. This observation provides insight into one potential mechanism underlying clinical inertia.
Authors: L S Phillips; W T Branch; C B Cook; J P Doyle; I M El-Kebbi; D L Gallina; C D Miller; D C Ziemer; C S Barnes Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2001-11-06 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Constance H Fung; Juliet N Woods; Steven M Asch; Peter Glassman; Bradley N Doebbeling Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: D R Berlowitz; A S Ash; E C Hickey; R H Friedman; M Glickman; B Kader; M A Moskowitz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1998-12-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Susan A Oliveria; Pablo Lapuerta; Bruce D McCarthy; Gilbert J L'Italien; Dan R Berlowitz; Steven M Asch Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2002-02-25
Authors: Nancy R Kressin; Fei Wang; Judith Long; Barbara G Bokhour; Michelle B Orner; James Rothendler; Christine Clark; Surekha Reddy; Waldemar Kozak; Laura P Kroupa; Dan R Berlowitz Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-03-16 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Meredith Manze; Adam J Rose; Michelle B Orner; Dan R Berlowitz; Nancy R Kressin Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-04-13 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: David J Hyman; Valory N Pavlik; Anthony J Greisinger; Wenyaw Chan; Jose Bayona; Carol Mansyur; Victor Simms; James Pool Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2011-10-27 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Adam J Rose; Mark E Glickman; Meredith M D'Amore; Michelle B Orner; Dan Berlowitz; Nancy R Kressin Journal: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) Date: 2011-02-16 Impact factor: 3.738
Authors: Ian M Kronish; Nathalie Moise; Thomas McGinn; Yan Quan; William Chaplin; Benjamin D Gallagher; Karina W Davidson Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: José R Banegas; Krista Lundelin; Mariano de la Figuera; Juan J de la Cruz; Auxiliadora Graciani; Fernando Rodríguez-Artalejo; Juan García Puig Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-09-14 Impact factor: 3.240