BACKGROUND: Adherence to evidence-based recommendations for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains unsatisfactory. OBJECTIVE: Quantifying association between using an electronic AMI order set (AMI-OS) and hospital processes and outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Twenty-one community hospitals. PATIENTS: A total of 5879 AMI patients were hospitalized between September 28, 2008 and December 31, 2010. MEASUREMENTS: We ascertained whether patients were treated using the AMI-OS or individual orders (a la carte). Dependent process variables were use of evidence-based care; outcome variables were mortality and rehospitalization. RESULTS: Use of individual and combined therapies improved outcomes (eg, 50% lower odds of 30-day mortality for patients with ≥3 therapies). The 3531 patients treated using the AMI-OS were more likely to receive evidence-based therapies (eg, 50% received 5 different therapies vs 36% a la carte). These patients had lower 30-day mortality (5.7% vs 8.5%) than the 2348 treated using a la carte orders. Although AMI-OS patients' predicted mortality risk was lower (3.2%) than that of a la carte patients (4.8%), the association of improved processes and outcomes with the use of the AMI-OS persisted after risk adjustment. For example, after inverse probability weighting, the relative risk for inpatient mortality in the AMI-OS group was 0.67 (95% confidence interval: 0.52-0.86). Inclusion of use of recommended therapies in risk adjustment eliminated the benefit of the AMI-OS, highlighting its mediating effect on adherence to evidence-based treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an electronic order set is associated with increased adherence to evidence-based care and better AMI outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Adherence to evidence-based recommendations for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains unsatisfactory. OBJECTIVE: Quantifying association between using an electronic AMI order set (AMI-OS) and hospital processes and outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Twenty-one community hospitals. PATIENTS: A total of 5879 AMI patients were hospitalized between September 28, 2008 and December 31, 2010. MEASUREMENTS: We ascertained whether patients were treated using the AMI-OS or individual orders (a la carte). Dependent process variables were use of evidence-based care; outcome variables were mortality and rehospitalization. RESULTS: Use of individual and combined therapies improved outcomes (eg, 50% lower odds of 30-day mortality for patients with ≥3 therapies). The 3531 patients treated using the AMI-OS were more likely to receive evidence-based therapies (eg, 50% received 5 different therapies vs 36% a la carte). These patients had lower 30-day mortality (5.7% vs 8.5%) than the 2348 treated using a la carte orders. Although AMI-OSpatients' predicted mortality risk was lower (3.2%) than that of a la carte patients (4.8%), the association of improved processes and outcomes with the use of the AMI-OS persisted after risk adjustment. For example, after inverse probability weighting, the relative risk for inpatient mortality in the AMI-OS group was 0.67 (95% confidence interval: 0.52-0.86). Inclusion of use of recommended therapies in risk adjustment eliminated the benefit of the AMI-OS, highlighting its mediating effect on adherence to evidence-based treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an electronic order set is associated with increased adherence to evidence-based care and better AMI outcomes.
Authors: Jason K Wang; Jason Hom; Santhosh Balasubramanian; Alejandro Schuler; Nigam H Shah; Mary K Goldstein; Michael T M Baiocchi; Jonathan H Chen Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2018-09-07 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Jonathan H Chen; Muthuraman Alagappan; Mary K Goldstein; Steven M Asch; Russ B Altman Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2017-03-18 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Dustin W Ballard; Ridhima Vemula; Uli K Chettipally; Mamata V Kene; Dustin G Mark; Andrew K Elms; James S Lin; Mary E Reed; Jie Huang; Adina S Rauchwerger; David R Vinson Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2016-09-21 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Dustin W Ballard; Anthony S Kim; Jie Huang; David K Park; Mamata V Kene; Uli K Chettipally; Hilary R Iskin; John Hsu; David R Vinson; Dustin G Mark; Mary E Reed Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2015-09-08 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Alexander C Flint; Carol Conell; Jeff G Klingman; Vivek A Rao; Sheila L Chan; Hooman Kamel; Sean P Cullen; Bonnie S Faigeles; Steve Sidney; S Claiborne Johnston Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2016-07-29 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Jonathan H Chen; Mary K Goldstein; Steven M Asch; Lester Mackey; Russ B Altman Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Jason K Wang; Alejandro Schuler; Nigam H Shah; Michael T M Baiocchi; Jonathan H Chen Journal: AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc Date: 2018-05-18