Susan M Abdel-Rahman1,2, Harpreet Gill3, Shannon L Carpenter2,4, Pathe Gueye3, Brian Wicklund2,4, Matt Breitkreutz3, Arindam Ghosh3, Avinash Kollu3. 1. Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Therapeutic Innovation, Children's Mercy, Kansas City, Missouri, United States. 2. Department of Pediatrics, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, Missouri, United States. 3. Department of Research Informatics, Children's Research Institute, Children's Mercy, Kansas City, Missouri, United States. 4. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Children's Mercy, Kansas City, Missouri, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the consequences of inadequate dosing ranging from increased bleeding risk to excessive drug costs and undesirable administration regimens, the antihemophilic factors are uniquely suited to dose individualization. However, existing options for individualization are limited and exist outside the flow of care. We developed clinical decision support (CDS) software that is integrated with our electronic health record (EHR) and designed to streamline the process for our hematology providers. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to develop and examine the usability of a CDS tool for antihemophilic factor dose individualization. METHODS: Our development strategy was based on the features associated with successful CDS tools and driven by a formal requirements analysis. The back-end code was based on algorithms developed for manual individualization and unit tested with 23,000 simulated patient profiles created from the range of patient-derived pharmacokinetic parameter estimates defined in children and adults. A 296-item heuristic checklist was used to guide design of the front-end user interface. Content experts and end-users were recruited to participate in traditional usability testing under an institutional review board approved protocol. RESULTS: CDS software was developed to systematically walk the point-of-care clinician through dose individualization after seamlessly importing the requisite patient data from the EHR. Classical and population pharmacokinetic approaches were incorporated with clearly displayed estimates of reliability and uncertainty. Users can perform simulations for prophylaxis and acute bleeds by providing two of four therapeutic targets. Testers were highly satisfied with our CDS and quickly became proficient with the tool. CONCLUSION: With early and broad stakeholder engagement, we developed a CDS tool for hematology provider that affords seamless transition from patient assessment, to pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation, and subsequent dose selection. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
BACKGROUND: With the consequences of inadequate dosing ranging from increased bleeding risk to excessive drug costs and undesirable administration regimens, the antihemophilic factors are uniquely suited to dose individualization. However, existing options for individualization are limited and exist outside the flow of care. We developed clinical decision support (CDS) software that is integrated with our electronic health record (EHR) and designed to streamline the process for our hematology providers. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to develop and examine the usability of a CDS tool for antihemophilic factor dose individualization. METHODS: Our development strategy was based on the features associated with successful CDS tools and driven by a formal requirements analysis. The back-end code was based on algorithms developed for manual individualization and unit tested with 23,000 simulated patient profiles created from the range of patient-derived pharmacokinetic parameter estimates defined in children and adults. A 296-item heuristic checklist was used to guide design of the front-end user interface. Content experts and end-users were recruited to participate in traditional usability testing under an institutional review board approved protocol. RESULTS: CDS software was developed to systematically walk the point-of-care clinician through dose individualization after seamlessly importing the requisite patient data from the EHR. Classical and population pharmacokinetic approaches were incorporated with clearly displayed estimates of reliability and uncertainty. Users can perform simulations for prophylaxis and acute bleeds by providing two of four therapeutic targets. Testers were highly satisfied with our CDS and quickly became proficient with the tool. CONCLUSION: With early and broad stakeholder engagement, we developed a CDS tool for hematology provider that affords seamless transition from patient assessment, to pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation, and subsequent dose selection. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.
Authors: M García-Dasí; J A Aznar; V Jiménez-Yuste; C Altisent; S Bonanad; E Mingot; F Lucía; F Giménez; M Fernanda López; P Marco; R Pérez; M Á Fernández; M J Paloma; B Galmes; S Herrero; J A García-Talavera Journal: Haemophilia Date: 2015-02-04 Impact factor: 4.287
Authors: David Lobach; Gillian D Sanders; Tiffani J Bright; Anthony Wong; Ravi Dhurjati; Erin Bristow; Lori Bastian; Remy Coeytaux; Gregory Samsa; Vic Hasselblad; John W Williams; Liz Wing; Michael Musty; Amy S Kendrick Journal: Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) Date: 2012-04
Authors: Alfonso Iorio; Arun Keepanasseril; Gary Foster; Tamara Navarro-Ruan; Alanna McEneny-King; Andrea N Edginton; Lehana Thabane Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2016-12-15
Authors: Susan M Abdel-Rahman; Matthew L Breitkreutz; Charlie Bi; Brett J Matzuka; Jignesh Dalal; K Leigh Casey; Uttam Garg; Sara Winkle; J Steven Leeder; JeanAnn Breedlove; Brian Rivera Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2016-03-30 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Robert P Pierce; Bernie R Eskridge; LeAnn Rehard; Brandi Ross; Margaret A Day; Jeffery L Belden Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Katy E Trinkley; Jonathan M Pell; Dario D Martinez; Nicola R Maude; Gary Hale; Michael A Rosenberg Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 2.342