PURPOSE: National guidelines recommend screening all persons with depression for bipolar disorder (BPD); one way to facilitate screening is through the use of electronic health records (EHRs). This study examined the impact of an EHR-based screening and decision support tool on diagnosis and treatment of BPD among patients diagnosed with depression in primary care offices. METHODS: This nonrandomized, controlled trial was conducted in a national network of offices using EHRs. The intervention included a screening instrument and other tools for diagnosis and management of BPD, which were embedded into the EHR. This instrument automatically activated when a patient with a diagnosis of depression but no diagnosis of BPD was seen in the office. The primary outcomes were the rates of new diagnoses of BPD and prescription of new BPD medications during the 6-month study period (April to October 2009). RESULTS: Twenty-one offices with 75 clinicians and 8355 adult patients with depression composed the intervention group, whereas 17 offices with 81 clinicians and 8799 adult patients with depression served as the comparison group. The screening tool was used with 47.5% of intervention patients, of whom 2.5% scored at high or very high risk for BPD. Intervention patients were more likely than comparison patients to be newly diagnosed with BPD (1.11% vs. 0.36%; P < .01) and be prescribed new BPD medications (1.85% vs. 1.19%; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that EHR-based tools can be useful for screening and management of BPD for patients with depression in primary care offices.
PURPOSE: National guidelines recommend screening all persons with depression for bipolar disorder (BPD); one way to facilitate screening is through the use of electronic health records (EHRs). This study examined the impact of an EHR-based screening and decision support tool on diagnosis and treatment of BPD among patients diagnosed with depression in primary care offices. METHODS: This nonrandomized, controlled trial was conducted in a national network of offices using EHRs. The intervention included a screening instrument and other tools for diagnosis and management of BPD, which were embedded into the EHR. This instrument automatically activated when a patient with a diagnosis of depression but no diagnosis of BPD was seen in the office. The primary outcomes were the rates of new diagnoses of BPD and prescription of new BPD medications during the 6-month study period (April to October 2009). RESULTS: Twenty-one offices with 75 clinicians and 8355 adult patients with depression composed the intervention group, whereas 17 offices with 81 clinicians and 8799 adult patients with depression served as the comparison group. The screening tool was used with 47.5% of intervention patients, of whom 2.5% scored at high or very high risk for BPD. Intervention patients were more likely than comparison patients to be newly diagnosed with BPD (1.11% vs. 0.36%; P < .01) and be prescribed new BPD medications (1.85% vs. 1.19%; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that EHR-based tools can be useful for screening and management of BPD for patients with depression in primary care offices.
Authors: John C Fortney; Jeffrey M Pyne; Susan Ward-Jones; Ian M Bennett; Joan Diehl; Kellee Farris; Joseph M Cerimele; Geoffrey M Curran Journal: Fam Syst Health Date: 2018-05-28 Impact factor: 1.950