Michael P Friebe1, Joseph R LeGrand2, Bryan E Shepherd3, Elizabeth A Breeden1, Scott D Nelson4. 1. Lipscomb University College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Nashville, Tennessee, United States. 2. HealthIT, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States. 4. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The American Geriatrics Society recommends against the use of certain potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older adults. Prescribing of these medications correlates with higher rates of hospital readmissions, morbidity, and mortality. Vanderbilt University Medical Center previously deployed clinical decision support (CDS) to decrease PIM prescribing rates, but recently transitioned to a new electronic health record (EHR). OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to evaluate PIM prescribing rates for older adults before and after migration to the new EHR system. METHODS: We reviewed prescribing rates of PIMs in adults 65 years and older, normalized per 100 total prescriptions from the legacy and new EHR systems between July 1, 2014 and December 31, 2019. The PIM prescribing rates before and after EHR migration during November 2017 were compared using a U-chart and Poisson regression model. Secondary analysis descriptively evaluated the frequency of prescriber acceptance rates in the new EHR. RESULTS: Prescribing rates of PIMs decreased 5.2% (13.5 per 100 prescriptions to 12.8 per 100 prescriptions; p < 0.0001) corresponding to the implementation of alternatives CDS in the legacy EHR. After migration of the alternative CDS from the legacy to the new EHR system, PIM prescribing rates dropped an additional 18.8% (10.4 per 100 prescriptions; p < 0.0001). Acceptance rates of the alternative recommendations for PIMs was low overall at 11.1%. CONCLUSION: The prescribing rate of PIMs in adults aged 65 years and older was successfully decreased with the implementation of prescribing CDS. This decrease was not only maintained but strengthened by the transition to a new EHR system. Thieme. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: The American Geriatrics Society recommends against the use of certain potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older adults. Prescribing of these medications correlates with higher rates of hospital readmissions, morbidity, and mortality. Vanderbilt University Medical Center previously deployed clinical decision support (CDS) to decrease PIM prescribing rates, but recently transitioned to a new electronic health record (EHR). OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to evaluate PIM prescribing rates for older adults before and after migration to the new EHR system. METHODS: We reviewed prescribing rates of PIMs in adults 65 years and older, normalized per 100 total prescriptions from the legacy and new EHR systems between July 1, 2014 and December 31, 2019. The PIM prescribing rates before and after EHR migration during November 2017 were compared using a U-chart and Poisson regression model. Secondary analysis descriptively evaluated the frequency of prescriber acceptance rates in the new EHR. RESULTS: Prescribing rates of PIMs decreased 5.2% (13.5 per 100 prescriptions to 12.8 per 100 prescriptions; p < 0.0001) corresponding to the implementation of alternatives CDS in the legacy EHR. After migration of the alternative CDS from the legacy to the new EHR system, PIM prescribing rates dropped an additional 18.8% (10.4 per 100 prescriptions; p < 0.0001). Acceptance rates of the alternative recommendations for PIMs was low overall at 11.1%. CONCLUSION: The prescribing rate of PIMs in adults aged 65 years and older was successfully decreased with the implementation of prescribing CDS. This decrease was not only maintained but strengthened by the transition to a new EHR system. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Authors: Richard T Griffey; Helen G Lo; Elisabeth Burdick; Carol Keohane; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-11-03 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Melissa Stevens; Susan N Hastings; Alayne D Markland; Ula Hwang; William Hung; Ann E Vandenberg; William Bryan; Dewayne Cross; James Powers; Gerald McGwin; Noor Fattouh; William Ho; Carolyn Clevenger; Camille P Vaughan Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2017-04-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Adrian Wong; Adam Wright; Diane L Seger; Mary G Amato; Julie M Fiskio; David Bates Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Timothy S Chang; Ashwin Buchipudi; Gregg C Fonarow; Michael A Pfeffer; Jennifer S Singer; Eric M Cheng Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2019-06-19 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Robyn Tamblyn; Tewodros Eguale; David L Buckeridge; Allen Huang; James Hanley; Kristen Reidel; Sherry Shi; Nancy Winslade Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-01-12 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: David C Classen; A Jay Holmgren; Zoe Co; Lisa P Newmark; Diane Seger; Melissa Danforth; David W Bates Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-05-01