'The Reports of My Death Are Greatly Exaggerated'-Evaluating the Effect of Necrosis on MGMT Promoter Methylation Testing in High-Grade Glioma.

(1) Background: MGMT (O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) promoter methylation remains an important predictive biomarker in high-grade gliomas (HGGs). The influence of necrosis on the fidelity of MGMT promoter (MGMTp) hypermethylation testing is currently unknown. Therefore, our study aims to evaluate the effect of varying degrees of necrosis on MGMTp status, as determined by pyrosequencing, in a series of primary and recurrent HGGs; (2) Methods: Within each case, the most viable blocks (assigned as 'true' MGMTp status) and the most necrotic block were determined by histopathology review. MGMTp status was determined by pyrosequencing. Comparisons of MGMTp status were made between the most viable and most necrotic blocks. (3) Results: 163 samples from 64 patients with HGGs were analyzed. MGMTp status was maintained in 84.6% of primary and 78.3% of recurrent HGGs between the most viable and necrotic blocks. A threshold of ≥60% tumor cellularity was established at which MGMTp status was unaltered, irrespective of the degree of necrosis. (4) Conclusions: MGMTp methylation status, as determined by pyrosequencing, does not appear to be influenced by necrosis in the majority of cases at a cellularity of at least 60%. Further investigation into the role of intratumoral heterogeneity on MGMTp status will increase our understanding of this predictive marker.

Qualitative study of challenges with recruitment of hospitals into a cluster controlled trial of clinical decision support in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers to hospital participation in controlled cluster trials of clinical decision support (CDS) and potential strategies for addressing barriers. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive design comprising semistructured interviews. SETTING: Five hospitals in New South Wales and one hospital in Queensland, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Senior hospital staff, including department directors, chief information officers and those working in health informatics teams. RESULTS: 20 senior hospital staff took part. Barriers to hospital-level recruitment primarily related to perceptions of risk associated with not implementing CDS as a control site. Perceived risks included reductions in patient safety, reputational risk and increased likelihood that benefits would not be achieved following electronic medical record (EMR) implementation without CDS alerts in place. Senior staff recommended clear communication of trial information to all relevant stakeholders as a key strategy for boosting hospital-level participation in trials. CONCLUSION: Hospital participation in controlled cluster trials of CDS is hindered by perceptions that adopting an EMR without CDS is risky for both patients and organisations. The improvements in safety expected to follow CDS implementation makes it challenging and counterintuitive for hospitals to implement EMR without incorporating CDS alerts for the purposes of a research trial. To counteract these barriers, clear communication regarding the evidence base and rationale for a controlled trial is needed.

Student Access to Electronic Medical Records: Missing an Opportunity to Prepare Our Workforce.

The use of an electronic medical record (EMR) during a student's clinical placement is intricately linked with student learning and skill development necessary to become a competent healthcare professional. However, significant variation currently exists in student EMR access and use within healthcare. In this study, we bring to light evidence of this variability amongst medical, nursing, pharmacy, and allied health student placements, both in policy and in practice. We found some health districts lack student policies on EMR use, as well as prohibiting important tasks including record writing capabilities. There was also variation in exposure to EMR training. In order to provide healthcare students with optimal education that includes technological competency, we identify a need for changes to both policies and practices.

Is evidence of effectiveness a driver for clinical decision support selection? A qualitative descriptive study of senior hospital staff.

Limited research has focused on understanding if and how evidence of health information technology (HIT) effectiveness drives the selection and implementation of technologies in practice. This study aimed to explore the views of senior hospital staff on the role evidence plays in the selection and implementation of HIT, with a particular focus on clinical decision support (CDS) alerts in electronic medication management systems. A qualitative descriptive design was used. Twenty senior hospital staff from six Australian hospitals in New South Wales and Queensland took part in a semistructured interview. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and a general inductive content analysis approach was used to identify themes. Participants acknowledged the importance of an evidence base, but reported that selection of CDS alerts, and HIT more broadly, was rarely underpinned by evidence that technologies improve patient care. Instead, investments in technologies were guided by the expectation that benefits will be achieved, bolstered by vendor assurances, and a perception that implementation of HIT is unavoidable. Postponing implementation of a technology until an evidence base is available was not always feasible. Although some technologies were seen as not requiring an evidence base, stakeholders viewed evidence as extremely valuable for informing decisions about selection of CDS alerts. In the absence of evidence, evaluation or monitoring of technologies postimplementation is critical, particularly to identify new errors or risks associated with HIT implementation and use. Increased transparency from vendors, with technology evaluation outcomes made directly available to healthcare organizations, may result in less reliance on logic, intuition, and vendor assertions and more evidence-based selection of HIT.