OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of computer-assisted decision support in reducing potentially inappropriate prescribing to older adults. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: An academic emergency department (ED) in Indianapolis, Indiana, where computerized physician order entry was used to write all medication prescriptions. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-three emergency physicians were randomized to the intervention (32 physicians) or control (31 physicians) group. INTERVENTION: Decision support that advised against use of nine potentially inappropriate medications and recommended safer substitute therapies. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the proportion of ED visits by seniors that resulted in one or more prescriptions for an inappropriate medication. The main secondary outcomes were the proportions of medications prescribed that were inappropriate and intervention physicians' reasons for rejecting the decision support. RESULTS:The average age of the patients was 74, two-thirds were female, and just over half were African American. Decision support was provided 114 times to intervention physicians, who accepted 49 (43%) of the recommendations. Intervention physicians prescribed one or more inappropriate medications during 2.6% of ED visits by seniors, compared with 3.9% of visits managed by control physicians (P=.02; odds ratio=0.55, 95% confidence interval=0.34-0.89). The proportion of all prescribed medications that were inappropriate significantly decreased from 5.4% to 3.4%. The most common reason for rejecting decision support was that the patient had no prior problems with the medication. CONCLUSION: Computerized physician order entry with decision support significantly reduced prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications for seniors. This approach might be used in other efforts to improve ED care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT00297869.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of computer-assisted decision support in reducing potentially inappropriate prescribing to older adults. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: An academic emergency department (ED) in Indianapolis, Indiana, where computerized physician order entry was used to write all medication prescriptions. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-three emergency physicians were randomized to the intervention (32 physicians) or control (31 physicians) group. INTERVENTION: Decision support that advised against use of nine potentially inappropriate medications and recommended safer substitute therapies. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the proportion of ED visits by seniors that resulted in one or more prescriptions for an inappropriate medication. The main secondary outcomes were the proportions of medications prescribed that were inappropriate and intervention physicians' reasons for rejecting the decision support. RESULTS: The average age of the patients was 74, two-thirds were female, and just over half were African American. Decision support was provided 114 times to intervention physicians, who accepted 49 (43%) of the recommendations. Intervention physicians prescribed one or more inappropriate medications during 2.6% of ED visits by seniors, compared with 3.9% of visits managed by control physicians (P=.02; odds ratio=0.55, 95% confidence interval=0.34-0.89). The proportion of all prescribed medications that were inappropriate significantly decreased from 5.4% to 3.4%. The most common reason for rejecting decision support was that the patient had no prior problems with the medication. CONCLUSION: Computerized physician order entry with decision support significantly reduced prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications for seniors. This approach might be used in other efforts to improve ED care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT00297869.
Authors: Brian L Strom; Rita Schinnar; Joshua Jones; Warren B Bilker; Mark G Weiner; Sean Hennessy; Charles E Leonard; Peter F Cronholm; Eric Pifer Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Richard T Griffey; Helen G Lo; Elisabeth Burdick; Carol Keohane; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-11-03 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Malaz A Boustani; Noll L Campbell; Babar A Khan; Greg Abernathy; Mohammed Zawahiri; Tiffany Campbell; Jason Tricker; Siu L Hui; John D Buckley; Anthony J Perkins; Mark O Farber; Christopher M Callahan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Shobha Phansalkar; Amrita A Desai; Douglas Bell; Eileen Yoshida; John Doole; Melissa Czochanski; Blackford Middleton; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Brian L Strom; Rita Schinnar; Warren Bilker; Sean Hennessy; Charles E Leonard; Eric Pifer Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Eva Blozik; Andreas M Born; Andreas E Stuck; Ulrich Benninger; Gerhard Gillmann; Kerri M Clough-Gorr Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2010-12-01 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Christopher R Carpenter; Manish N Shah; Fredric M Hustey; Kennon Heard; Lowell W Gerson; Douglas K Miller Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2011-04-17 Impact factor: 6.053