Jennifer L St Sauver1, Suzette J Bielinski2, Janet E Olson2, Elizabeth J Bell2, Michaela E Mc Gree3, Debra J Jacobson3, Jennifer B McCormick4, Pedro J Caraballo5, Paul Y Takahashi6, Veronique L Roger7, Carolyn R Rohrer Vitek8. 1. Division of Epidemiology, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. Electronic address: StSauver.Jennifer@mayo.edu. 2. Division of Epidemiology, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. 3. Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. 4. Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. 5. Department of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. 6. Department of Primary Care Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. 7. Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. 8. Center for Individualized Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited information is available regarding primary care clinicians' response to pharmacogenomic clinical decision support (PGx-CDS) alerts integrated in the electronic health record. METHODS: In February 2015, 159 clinicians in the Mayo Clinic primary care practice were sent e-mail surveys to understand their perspectives on the implementation and use of pharmacogenomic testing in their clinical practice. Surveys assessed how the clinicians felt about pharmacogenomics and whether they thought electronic PGx-CDS alerts were useful. Information was abstracted on the number of CDS alerts the clinicians received between October 2013 and the date their survey was returned. CDS alerts were grouped into 2 categories: the alert recommended caution using the prescription, or the alert recommended an alternate prescription. Finally, data were abstracted regarding whether the clinician changed their prescription in response to the alert recommendation. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 57% (n = 90). Overall, 52% of the clinicians did not expect to use or did not know whether they would use pharmacogenomic information in their future prescribing practices. Additionally, 53% of the clinicians felt that the alerts were confusing, irritating, frustrating, or that it was difficult to find additional information. Finally, only 30% of the clinicians that received a CDS alert changed their prescription to an alternative medication. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a lack of clinician comfort with integration of pharmacogenomic data into primary care. Further efforts to refine PGx-CDS alerts to make them as useful and user-friendly as possible are needed to improve clinician satisfaction with these new tools.
BACKGROUND: Limited information is available regarding primary care clinicians' response to pharmacogenomic clinical decision support (PGx-CDS) alerts integrated in the electronic health record. METHODS: In February 2015, 159 clinicians in the Mayo Clinic primary care practice were sent e-mail surveys to understand their perspectives on the implementation and use of pharmacogenomic testing in their clinical practice. Surveys assessed how the clinicians felt about pharmacogenomics and whether they thought electronic PGx-CDS alerts were useful. Information was abstracted on the number of CDS alerts the clinicians received between October 2013 and the date their survey was returned. CDS alerts were grouped into 2 categories: the alert recommended caution using the prescription, or the alert recommended an alternate prescription. Finally, data were abstracted regarding whether the clinician changed their prescription in response to the alert recommendation. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 57% (n = 90). Overall, 52% of the clinicians did not expect to use or did not know whether they would use pharmacogenomic information in their future prescribing practices. Additionally, 53% of the clinicians felt that the alerts were confusing, irritating, frustrating, or that it was difficult to find additional information. Finally, only 30% of the clinicians that received a CDS alert changed their prescription to an alternative medication. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a lack of clinician comfort with integration of pharmacogenomic data into primary care. Further efforts to refine PGx-CDS alerts to make them as useful and user-friendly as possible are needed to improve clinician satisfaction with these new tools.
Authors: Emily Beth Devine; Chia-Ju Lee; Casey L Overby; Neil Abernethy; Jeannine McCune; Joe W Smith; Peter Tarczy-Hornoch Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Haridarshan N Patel; Iulia D Ursan; Patrick M Zueger; Larisa H Cavallari; A Simon Pickard Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 4.705
Authors: E Kate Reed; Katherine A Johansen Taber; Therese Ingram Nissen; Suzanna Schott; Lynn O Dowling; James C O'Leary; Joan A Scott Journal: Genet Med Date: 2015-11-19 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Suzette J Bielinski; Jennifer L St Sauver; Janet E Olson; Nicholas B Larson; John L Black; Steven E Scherer; Matthew E Bernard; Eric Boerwinkle; Bijan J Borah; Pedro J Caraballo; Timothy B Curry; HarshaVardhan Doddapaneni; Christine M Formea; Robert R Freimuth; Richard A Gibbs; Jyothsna Giri; Matthew A Hathcock; Jianhong Hu; Debra J Jacobson; Leila A Jones; Sara Kalla; Tyler H Koep; Viktoriya Korchina; Christie L Kovar; Sandra Lee; Hongfang Liu; Eric T Matey; Michaela E McGree; Tammy M McAllister; Ann M Moyer; Donna M Muzny; Wayne T Nicholson; Lance J Oyen; Xiang Qin; Ritika Raj; Véronique L Roger; Carolyn R Rohrer Vitek; Jason L Ross; Richard R Sharp; Paul Y Takahashi; Eric Venner; Kimberly Walker; Liwei Wang; Qiaoyan Wang; Jessica A Wright; Tsung-Jung Wu; Liewei Wang; Richard M Weinshilboum Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Carolyn R Rohrer Vitek; Noura S Abul-Husn; John J Connolly; Andrea L Hartzler; Terrie Kitchner; Josh F Peterson; Luke V Rasmussen; Maureen E Smith; Sarah Stallings; Marc S Williams; Wendy A Wolf; Cynthia A Prows Journal: Pharmacogenomics Date: 2017-06-22 Impact factor: 2.533
Authors: Timothy M Herr; Josh F Peterson; Luke V Rasmussen; Pedro J Caraballo; Peggy L Peissig; Justin B Starren Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Pedro J Caraballo; Joseph A Sutton; Jyothsna Giri; Jessica A Wright; Wayne T Nicholson; Iftikhar J Kullo; Mark A Parkulo; Suzette J Bielinski; Ann M Moyer Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Nicholas J Keeling; Tyler J Dunn; John P Bentley; Sujith Ramachandran; James M Hoffman; Meagen Rosenthal Journal: Genet Med Date: 2021-04-29 Impact factor: 8.822