Are we measuring the right end-points? Variables that affect the impact of computerised decision support on patient outcomes: A systematic review

Vitali Sintchenko*, Farah Magrabi, Steven Tipper

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

39 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Previous reviews of electronic decision-support systems (EDSS) have often treated them as a single category, and factors that may modify their effectiveness of EDSS have not been examined. The objective was to summarise the evidence associating the use of computerised decision support and improved patient outcomes. PubMed/Medline and the Database of Abstracts were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCT) of EDSS from 1 January 1994 to 31 January 2006. Twenty-four RCT studies from 97 reviewed were selected, eight of them examined systems supporting decisions for patients who presented with an acute illness, and 16 studies enrolled patients with chronic conditions. Overall, 13 (54%) of the studies showed a positive result, and 11 (46%) were with no impact. Critiquing and consultative systems showed the impact in 71% and 47% of studies, respectively. All systems targeting decisions related to acute disease improved patient outcomes compared with 38% of systems focused on the management of chronic conditions (P = 0.005). Provision of EDSS improves prescribing practices and treatment outcomes of patients with acute illnesses; however, EDSS were less effective in primary care. Complex interventions as clinical EDSS may require new metrics of assessment to describe the impact on patient outcomes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)225-240
Number of pages16
JournalInformatics for Health and Social Care
Volume32
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Are we measuring the right end-points? Variables that affect the impact of computerised decision support on patient outcomes: A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this