BACKGROUND: Dyslipidemia remains underdiagnosed and undertreated in patients with coronary artery disease. The Computer-based Clinical Decision Support System provides an opportunity t close these gaps. OBJECTIVES: To study the impact of computerized intervention on secondary prevention of CAD. METHODS: The CDSS was programmed to automatically detect patients with CAD and to evaluate the availability of an updated lipoprotein profile and treatment with lipid-lowering drugs. The program produced automatic computer-generated monitoring and treatment recommendations. Adjusted primary clinics were randomly assigned to intervention (n=56) or standard care arms (n=56). Reminders were mailed to the primary medical teams in the intervention arm every 4 months updating them with current lipid levels and recommendations for further treatment. Compliance and lipid levels were monitored. The study group comprised all patients with CAD who were alive at least 3 months after hospitalization. RESULTS: Follow-up was available for 7448 patients (median 19.8 months, range 6-36 months). Overall, 51.7% of patients were adequately screened, and 55.7% of patients were compliant with treatment to lower lipid level. In patients with initial low density lipoprotein >120 mg/dl, a significant decrease in LDL levels was observed in both arms, but was more pronounced in the intervention arm: 121.9 +/- 34.2 vs. 124.3 +/- 34.6 mg/dl (P < 0.02). A significantly lower rate of cardiac rehospitalizations was documented in patients who were adequately treated with lipid-lowering drugs, 37% vs. 40.9% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This initial assessment of our data represent a real-world snapshot where physicians and CAD patients often do not adhere to clinical guidelines, presenting a major obstacle to implementing effective secondary prevention. Our automatic computerized reminders system substantially facilitates adherence to guidelines and supports wide-range implementation.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Dyslipidemia remains underdiagnosed and undertreated in patients with coronary artery disease. The Computer-based Clinical Decision Support System provides an opportunity t close these gaps. OBJECTIVES: To study the impact of computerized intervention on secondary prevention of CAD. METHODS: The CDSS was programmed to automatically detect patients with CAD and to evaluate the availability of an updated lipoprotein profile and treatment with lipid-lowering drugs. The program produced automatic computer-generated monitoring and treatment recommendations. Adjusted primary clinics were randomly assigned to intervention (n=56) or standard care arms (n=56). Reminders were mailed to the primary medical teams in the intervention arm every 4 months updating them with current lipid levels and recommendations for further treatment. Compliance and lipid levels were monitored. The study group comprised all patients with CAD who were alive at least 3 months after hospitalization. RESULTS: Follow-up was available for 7448 patients (median 19.8 months, range 6-36 months). Overall, 51.7% of patients were adequately screened, and 55.7% of patients were compliant with treatment to lower lipid level. In patients with initial low density lipoprotein >120 mg/dl, a significant decrease in LDL levels was observed in both arms, but was more pronounced in the intervention arm: 121.9 +/- 34.2 vs. 124.3 +/- 34.6 mg/dl (P < 0.02). A significantly lower rate of cardiac rehospitalizations was documented in patients who were adequately treated with lipid-lowering drugs, 37% vs. 40.9% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This initial assessment of our data represent a real-world snapshot where physicians and CAD patients often do not adhere to clinical guidelines, presenting a major obstacle to implementing effective secondary prevention. Our automatic computerized reminders system substantially facilitates adherence to guidelines and supports wide-range implementation.
Authors: Stacy D O'Connor; Aaron D Sodickson; Ivan K Ip; Ali S Raja; Michael J Healey; Louise I Schneider; Ramin Khorasani Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: K Ann McKibbon; Cynthia Lokker; Steven M Handler; Lisa R Dolovich; Anne M Holbrook; Daria O'Reilly; Robyn Tamblyn; Brian J Hemens; Runki Basu; Sue Troyan; Pavel S Roshanov Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-08-18 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Pavel S Roshanov; John J You; Jasmine Dhaliwal; David Koff; Jean A Mackay; Lorraine Weise-Kelly; Tamara Navarro; Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2011-08-03 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Pavel S Roshanov; Shikha Misra; Hertzel C Gerstein; Amit X Garg; Rolf J Sebaldt; Jean A Mackay; Lorraine Weise-Kelly; Tamara Navarro; Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2011-08-03 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Brian J Hemens; Anne Holbrook; Marita Tonkin; Jean A Mackay; Lorraine Weise-Kelly; Tamara Navarro; Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2011-08-03 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: K M Augestad; G Berntsen; K Lassen; J G Bellika; R Wootton; R O Lindsetmo Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-07-29 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Raghupathy Anchala; Maria P Pinto; Amir Shroufi; Rajiv Chowdhury; Jean Sanderson; Laura Johnson; Patricia Blanco; Dorairaj Prabhakaran; Oscar H Franco Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-10-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Kavishwar Balwant Wagholikar; Kathy L MacLaughlin; Thomas M Kastner; Petra M Casey; Michael Henry; Robert A Greenes; Hongfang Liu; Rajeev Chaudhry Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-04-05 Impact factor: 4.497