4.6 Article

Integrating best of care protocols into clinicians' workflow via care provider order entry: Impact on quality-of-care indicators for acute myocardial infarction

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M1656

关键词

-

资金

  1. AHRQ HHS [HS 1-0384] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NLM NIH HHS [R01 LM07995, R01LM06920] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: In the context of an inpatient care provider order entry (CPOE) system, to evaluate the impact of a decision support tool on integration of cardiology best of care order sets into clinicians' admission workflow, and on quality measures for the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. Design: A before-and-after study of physician orders evaluated (1) per-patient use rates of standardized acute coronary syndrome (ACS) order set and (2) patient-level compliance with two individual recommendations: early aspirin ordering and beta-blocker ordering. Measurements: The effectiveness of the intervention was evaluated for (1) all patients with ACS (suspected for AMI at the time of admission) (N = 540) and (2) the subset of the ACS patients with confirmed discharge diagnosis of AMI (n = 180) who comprise the recommended target population who should receive aspirin and/or beta-blockers. Compliance rates for use of the ACS order set, aspirin ordering, and beta-blocker ordering were calculated as the percentages of patients who had each action performed within 24 hours of admission. Results: For all ACS admissions, the decision support tool significantly increased use of the ACS order set (p = 0.009). Use of the ACS order set led, within the first 24 hours of hospitalization, to a significant increase in the number of patients who received aspirin (p = 0.001) and a nonsignificant increase in the number of patients who received beta-blockers (p = 0.07). Results for confirmed AMI cases demonstrated similar increases, but did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: The decision support tool increased optional use of the ACS order set, but room for additional improvement exists.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据