| Literature DB >> 33594410 |
Alan H Morris1,2, Brian Stagg3, Michael Lanspa4, James Orme1,2,4, Terry P Clemmer1,2,4,5, Lindell K Weaver1,2,4, Frank Thomas6,5, Colin K Grissom1,2,4, Ellie Hirshberg4, Thomas D East7, Carrie Jane Wallace3,5, Michael P Young8, Dean F Sittig9, Antonio Pesenti10, Michela Bombino11, Eduardo Beck12, Katherine A Sward2,13, Charlene Weir2,13, Shobha S Phansalkar14, Gordon R Bernard15, B Taylor Thompson16, Roy Brower17, Jonathon D Truwit18, Jay Steingrub19, R Duncan Hite20, Douglas F Willson21, Jerry J Zimmerman22, Vinay M Nadkarni23,24, Adrienne Randolph25, Martha A Q Curley24,26, Christopher J L Newth27, Jacques Lacroix28, Michael S D Agus25, Kang H Lee29, Bennett P deBoisblanc30, R Scott Evans2,5, Dean K Sorenson2,5, Anthony Wong31, Michael V Boland32, David W Grainger33, Willard H Dere33, Alan S Crandall3, Julio C Facelli2,34, Stanley M Huff2, Peter J Haug2, Ulrike Pielmeier35, Stephen E Rees35, Dan S Karbing35, Steen Andreassen35, Eddy Fan36, Roberta M Goldring37, Kenneth I Berger37, Beno W Oppenheimer37, E Wesley Ely15,38,39, Ognjen Gajic40, Brian Pickering41, David A Schoenfeld42, Irena Tocino43, Russell S Gonnering44, Peter J Pronovost45, Lucy A Savitz46, Didier Dreyfuss47, Arthur S Slutsky48, James D Crapo49, Derek Angus50, Michael R Pinsky50, Brent James51, Donald Berwick52.
Abstract
Clinical decision-making is based on knowledge, expertise, and authority, with clinicians approving almost every intervention-the starting point for delivery of "All the right care, but only the right care," an unachieved healthcare quality improvement goal. Unaided clinicians suffer from human cognitive limitations and biases when decisions are based only on their training, expertise, and experience. Electronic health records (EHRs) could improve healthcare with robust decision-support tools that reduce unwarranted variation of clinician decisions and actions. Current EHRs, focused on results review, documentation, and accounting, are awkward, time-consuming, and contribute to clinician stress and burnout. Decision-support tools could reduce clinician burden and enable replicable clinician decisions and actions that personalize patient care. Most current clinical decision-support tools or aids lack detail and neither reduce burden nor enable replicable actions. Clinicians must provide subjective interpretation and missing logic, thus introducing personal biases and mindless, unwarranted, variation from evidence-based practice. Replicability occurs when different clinicians, with the same patient information and context, come to the same decision and action. We propose a feasible subset of therapeutic decision-support tools based on credible clinical outcome evidence: computer protocols leading to replicable clinician actions (eActions). eActions enable different clinicians to make consistent decisions and actions when faced with the same patient input data. eActions embrace good everyday decision-making informed by evidence, experience, EHR data, and individual patient status. eActions can reduce unwarranted variation, increase quality of clinical care and research, reduce EHR noise, and could enable a learning healthcare system.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33594410 PMCID: PMC8661391 DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa294
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc ISSN: 1067-5027 Impact factor: 4.497