Comparison of Computer-based Clinical Decision Support Systems and Content for Diabetes Mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Computer-based clinical decision support (CDS) systems have been shown to improve quality of care and workflow efficiency, and health care reform legislation relies on electronic health records and CDS systems to improve the cost and quality of health care in the United States; however, the heterogeneity of CDS content and infrastructure of CDS systems across sites is not well known. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the scope of CDS content in diabetes care at six sites, assess the capabilities of CDS in use at these sites, characterize the scope of CDS infrastructure at these sites, and determine how the sites use CDS beyond individual patient care in order to identify characteristics of CDS systems and content that have been successfully implemented in diabetes care. METHODS: We compared CDS systems in six collaborating sites of the Clinical Decision Support Consortium. We gathered CDS content on care for patients with diabetes mellitus and surveyed institutions on characteristics of their site, the infrastructure of CDS at these sites, and the capabilities of CDS at these sites. RESULTS: The approach to CDS and the characteristics of CDS content varied among sites. Some commonalities included providing customizability by role or user, applying sophisticated exclusion criteria, and using CDS automatically at the time of decision-making. Many messages were actionable recommendations. Most sites had monitoring rules (e.g. assessing hemoglobin A1c), but few had rules to diagnose diabetes or suggest specific treatments. All sites had numerous prevention rules including reminders for providing eye examinations, influenza vaccines, lipid screenings, nephropathy screenings, and pneumococcal vaccines. CONCLUSION: Computer-based CDS systems vary widely across sites in content and scope, but both institution-created and purchased systems had many similar features and functionality, such as integration of alerts and reminders into the decision-making workflow of the provider and providing messages that are actionable recommendations.

Using an electronic medical record to identify opportunities to improve compliance with cholesterol guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To use an electronic medical record to measure rates of compliance with the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) cholesterol guidelines for secondary prevention, to characterize the patterns of noncompliance, and to identify patient and physician-specific correlates of noncompliance. DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of data extracted from an electronic medical record. SETTING: Nineteen primary care clinics affiliated with a tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: All patients who visited their primary care physician in the preceding year who met criteria for secondary prevention of hypercholesterolemia. INTERVENTIONS: None. The main outcome was rate of compliance with NCEP cholesterol guidelines. MAIN RESULTS: Of 2,019 patients who qualified for secondary prevention, only 31% were in compliance with NCEP recommendations, although 44% were on lipid-lowering therapy. There was no low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) on record within the last three years for 771 (38%), and another 809 (40%) had a recent LDL-C that was above the recommended target of 100 mg/dL. Of the latter group, 374 (46%) were not on a statin, including 188 patients with an LDL-C >130 mg/dL. Compliance among secondary prevention patients with cerebrovascular or peripheral vascular disease, but not coronary disease, was even lower: 19% versus 36%, P <.0001. Most of the additional noncompliant patients never had an LDL-C checked. Patient-specific factors associated with compliance included having seen a cardiologist (45% vs 21%); having had a recent admission for myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or angina (41% vs 26%); being male (37% vs 24%); and being white (34% vs 26%). Patients over 79 and under 50 years old also were less likely to be compliant (22% vs 34% for 50-79 year olds). There were no significant differences in compliance rates based on physician-specific factors, such as level of training, gender, or panel size. CONCLUSION: We found poor compliance with nationally published and well-accepted guidelines on diagnosing and treating hypercholesterolemia in secondary prevention patients. Compliance was unrelated to physician or physician-specific characteristics, but it was especially low for women, African Americans, patients without a cardiologist, and patients with cerebrovascular and peripheral vascular disease.