Acceptance and barriers pertaining to a general practice decision support system for multiple clinical conditions : A mixed methods evaluation
BACKGROUND: Many studies have investigated the use of clinical decision support systems as a means to improve care, but have thus far failed to show significant effects on patient-related outcomes. We developed a clinical decision support system that attempted to address issues that were identified in these studies. The system was implemented in Dutch general practice and was designed to be both unobtrusive and to respond in real time. Despite our efforts, usage of the system was low. In the current study we perform a mixed methods evaluation to identify remediable barriers which led to disappointing usage rates for our system.
METHODS: A mixed methods evaluation employing an online questionnaire and focus group. The focus group was organized to clarify free text comments and receive more detailed feedback from general practitioners. Topics consisted of items based on results from the survey and additional open questions.
RESULTS: The response rate for the questionnaire was 94%. Results from the questionnaire and focus group can be summarized as follows: The system was perceived as interruptive, despite its design. Participants felt that there were too many recommendations and that the relevance of the recommendations varied. Demographic based recommendations (e.g. age) were often irrelevant, while specific risk-based recommendations (e.g. diagnosis) were more relevant. The other main barrier to use was lack of time during the patient visit.
CONCLUSION: These results are likely to be useful to other researchers who are attempting to address the problems of interruption and alert fatigue in decision support.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2018 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2018 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:13 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
PloS one - 13(2018), 4 vom: 17., Seite e0193187 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Arts, Derk L [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 18.07.2018 Date Revised 02.12.2018 published: Electronic-eCollection Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1371/journal.pone.0193187 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM283205970 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM283205970 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225035958.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1371/journal.pone.0193187 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n0944.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM283205970 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)29672521 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Arts, Derk L |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Acceptance and barriers pertaining to a general practice decision support system for multiple clinical conditions |b A mixed methods evaluation |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2018 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 18.07.2018 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 02.12.2018 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic-eCollection | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: Many studies have investigated the use of clinical decision support systems as a means to improve care, but have thus far failed to show significant effects on patient-related outcomes. We developed a clinical decision support system that attempted to address issues that were identified in these studies. The system was implemented in Dutch general practice and was designed to be both unobtrusive and to respond in real time. Despite our efforts, usage of the system was low. In the current study we perform a mixed methods evaluation to identify remediable barriers which led to disappointing usage rates for our system | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: A mixed methods evaluation employing an online questionnaire and focus group. The focus group was organized to clarify free text comments and receive more detailed feedback from general practitioners. Topics consisted of items based on results from the survey and additional open questions | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: The response rate for the questionnaire was 94%. Results from the questionnaire and focus group can be summarized as follows: The system was perceived as interruptive, despite its design. Participants felt that there were too many recommendations and that the relevance of the recommendations varied. Demographic based recommendations (e.g. age) were often irrelevant, while specific risk-based recommendations (e.g. diagnosis) were more relevant. The other main barrier to use was lack of time during the patient visit | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: These results are likely to be useful to other researchers who are attempting to address the problems of interruption and alert fatigue in decision support | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Medlock, Stephanie K |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a van Weert, Henk C P M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wyatt, Jeremy C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Abu-Hanna, Ameen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t PloS one |d 2006 |g 13(2018), 4 vom: 17., Seite e0193187 |w (DE-627)NLM167327399 |x 1932-6203 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:13 |g year:2018 |g number:4 |g day:17 |g pages:e0193187 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193187 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 13 |j 2018 |e 4 |b 17 |h e0193187 | ||