Literature DB >> 33107000

Changing Provider PSA Screening Behavior Using Best Practice Advisories: Interventional Study in a Multispecialty Group Practice.

Joseph Presti1,2, Stacey Alexeeff3, Brandon Horton3, Stephanie Prausnitz3, Andrew L Avins3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most guidelines recommend against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men ≥ 70 years of age. Adherence to these guidelines is variable.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of a "Best Practice Advisory" (BPA) intervention within the electronic medical record (EMR) system can alter the rate of PSA screening in men ≥ 70 years of age.
DESIGN: This is an interventional study spanning the years 2013 through 2017, in men ≥ 70 years of age in Kaiser Permanente Northern California with no prior history of prostate cancer. The BPA intervention was activated in the EMR system on October 15, 2015, with no prior notice or education.
SETTING: Integrated healthcare system including all Kaiser Permanente Northern California facilities. PARTICIPANTS: A population-based sample that included all male members ≥ 70 years of age without a history of prostate cancer. MAIN MEASURES: The main outcome was the rate of PSA testing in men ≥ 70 years of age. We compared the rates of PSA testing between the pre-BPA period (January 1, 2013-October 14, 2015) and the post-BPA period (October 15, 2015-December 31, 2017). An interrupted time series analysis of PSA ordering rates was performed. KEY
RESULTS: Following the 2015 BPA intervention, screening rates substantially declined from 36.0 per 100 person-years to 14.9 per 100 person-years (rate ratio = 0.415; 95% CI: 0.410-0.419). The effect of the BPA was comparable among all patient races and ordering provider specialties. The interrupted time series analysis showed a rapid, large, and sustained drop in the rate of PSA ordering, and much less temporal variation in test ordering after activation of the BPA.
CONCLUSION: Following activation of a BPA within the EMR, the rates of inappropriate PSA testing significantly declined by 58.5% in men ≥ 70 years of age and temporal variation was reduced.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PSA; prostate cancer; screening

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33107000      PMCID: PMC7652982          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-020-06097-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  14 in total

1.  Assessment of a Targeted Electronic Health Record Intervention to Reduce Telemetry Duration: A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Nader Najafi; Russ Cucina; Bruce Pierre; Raman Khanna
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 21.873

2.  Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline.

Authors:  H Ballentine Carter; Peter C Albertsen; Michael J Barry; Ruth Etzioni; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Lynn Greene; Lars Holmberg; Philip Kantoff; Badrinath R Konety; Mohammad Hassan Murad; David F Penson; Anthony L Zietman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Effect of population-based interventions on laboratory utilization: a time-series analysis.

Authors:  C van Walraven; V Goel; B Chan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-12-16       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Impact of providing fee data on laboratory test ordering: a controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Leonard S Feldman; Hasan M Shihab; David Thiemann; Hsin-Chieh Yeh; Margaret Ardolino; Steven Mandell; Daniel J Brotman
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-05-27       Impact factor: 21.873

5.  Evaluating clinical decision support systems: monitoring CPOE order check override rates in the Department of Veterans Affairs' Computerized Patient Record System.

Authors:  Ching-Ping Lin; Thomas H Payne; W Paul Nichol; Patricia J Hoey; Curtis L Anderson; John H Gennari
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2008-06-25       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  Screening and prostate cancer mortality: results of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) at 13 years of follow-up.

Authors:  Fritz H Schröder; Jonas Hugosson; Monique J Roobol; Teuvo L J Tammela; Marco Zappa; Vera Nelen; Maciej Kwiatkowski; Marcos Lujan; Liisa Määttänen; Hans Lilja; Louis J Denis; Franz Recker; Alvaro Paez; Chris H Bangma; Sigrid Carlsson; Donella Puliti; Arnauld Villers; Xavier Rebillard; Matti Hakama; Ulf-Hakan Stenman; Paula Kujala; Kimmo Taari; Gunnar Aus; Andreas Huber; Theo H van der Kwast; Ron H N van Schaik; Harry J de Koning; Sue M Moss; Anssi Auvinen
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Screening for prostate cancer: a guidance statement from the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians.

Authors:  Amir Qaseem; Michael J Barry; Thomas D Denberg; Douglas K Owens; Paul Shekelle
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial.

Authors:  James Lopez Bernal; Steven Cummins; Antonio Gasparrini
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 7.196

9.  The role of a best practice alert in the electronic medical record in reducing repetitive lab tests.

Authors:  Harini Bejjanki; Lazarus K Mramba; Stacy G Beal; Nila Radhakrishnan; Rohit Bishnoi; Chintan Shah; Nikhil Agrawal; Neil Harris; Robert Leverence; Kenneth Rand
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2018-10-08

10.  "Reducing unnecessary testing in a CPOE system through implementation of a targeted CDS intervention".

Authors:  Donald L Levick; Glenn Stern; Chad D Meyerhoefer; Aaron Levick; David Pucklavage
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 2.796

View more
  1 in total

1.  Responding to the Call: a New JGIM Area of Emphasis for Implementation and Quality Improvement Sciences.

Authors:  Christian D Helfrich; Lucy A Savitz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 5.128

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.