Review of computerized clinical decision support in community pharmacy

被引:43
|
作者
Curtain, C. [1 ,2 ]
Peterson, G. M. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tasmania, Sch Med, Hobart, Tas 7001, Australia
[2] Univ Tasmania, Unit Medicat Outcomes Res & Educ, Hobart, Tas 7001, Australia
关键词
community pharmacy; computerized decision support systems; medication; pharmacists; prescribing; IMPROVE PRESCRIBING SAFETY; DRUG-INTERACTION ALERTS; DISPENSING SOFTWARE; PATIENT OUTCOMES; PRACTITIONER PERFORMANCE; RANDOMIZED-TRIAL; SYSTEMS; CARE; QUALITY; PROMPT;
D O I
10.1111/jcpt.12168
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
What is known and objective: Clinical decision support software (CDSS) has been increasingly implemented to assist improved prescribing practice. Reviews and studies report generally positive results regarding prescribing changes and, to a lesser extent, patient outcomes. Little information is available, however, concerning the use of CDSS in community pharmacy practice. Given the apparent paucity of publications examining this topic, we conducted a review to determine whether CDSS in community pharmacy practice can improve medication use and patient outcomes. Methods: A literature search of articles on CDSS relevant to community pharmacy and published between 1 January 2005 and 21 October 2013 was undertaken. Articles were included if the healthcare setting was community pharmacy and the article indicated that pharmacy use of CDSS was part of the study intervention. Results and discussion: Eight studies were found which assessed counselling, selected drug interactions, inappropriate prescribing and under-prescribing. One study was halted due to insufficient data collection. Six studies showed statistically significant improvements in the measured outcomes: increased patient counselling, 31% reduced frequency of drug-drug interactions (DDIs), reduced frequency of inappropriate medications in the elderly (2.2-1.8% patients) and in pregnant women (5.5-2.9% patients), and increased pharmacists' interventions for under-prescribed low-dose aspirin (1.74 vs. 0.91 per 100 patients with type 2 diabetes) and over-prescribed high-dose proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) (1.67 vs. 0.17 interventions per 100 high-dose PPI prescriptions). What is new and conclusion: Most studies showed improved prescribing practice, via direct communication between pharmacists and doctors or indirectly via patient education. Factors limiting the impact of improved prescribing included alert fatigue and clinical inertia. No study investigated patient outcomes and little investigation had been undertaken on how CDSS could be best implemented. Few studies have been undertaken in community pharmacy practice, and based on the positive findings reported, further research should be directed in this area, including investigation of patient outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:343 / 348
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Clinical decision support in small community practice settings: a case study
    Ash, Joan S.
    Sittig, Dean F.
    Wright, Adam
    McMullen, Carmit
    Shapiro, Michael
    Bunce, Arwen
    Middleton, Blackford
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2011, 18 (06) : 879 - 882
  • [22] Design Components of Clinical Work Environments with Computerized Decision Support Systems
    Wilkens, Uta
    Artinger, Florian M.
    INTELLIGENT HUMAN SYSTEMS INTEGRATION 2019, 2019, 903 : 137 - 141
  • [23] Combining text mining with clinical decision support in clinical practice: a scoping review
    van de Burgt, Britt W. M.
    Wasylewicz, Arthur T. M.
    Dullemond, Bjorn
    Grouls, Rene J. E.
    Egberts, Toine C. G.
    Bouwman, Arthur
    Korsten, Erik M. M.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2023, 30 (03) : 588 - 603
  • [24] The use of computerized clinical decision support systems in emergency care: a substantive review of the literature
    Bennett, Paula
    Hardiker, Nicholas R.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2017, 24 (03) : 655 - 668
  • [25] Features of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems Supportive of Nursing Practice A Literature Review
    Lee, Seonah
    CIN-COMPUTERS INFORMATICS NURSING, 2013, 31 (10) : 477 - 495
  • [26] Delphi Consensus on the Feasibility of Translating the ACEP Clinical Policies Into Computerized Clinical Decision Support
    Melnick, Edward R.
    Nielson, Jeffrey A.
    Finnell, John T.
    Bullard, Michael J.
    Cantrill, Stephen V.
    Cochrane, Dennis G.
    Halamka, John D.
    Handler, Jonathan A.
    Holroyd, Brian R.
    Kamens, Donald
    Kho, Abel
    McClay, James
    Shapiro, Jason S.
    Teich, Jonathan
    Wears, Robert L.
    Patel, Saumil J.
    Ward, Mary F.
    Richardson, Lynne D.
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2010, 56 (04) : 317 - 320
  • [27] Evaluating the costs and consequences of computerized clinical decision support systems in hospitals: a scoping review and recommendations for future practice
    White, Nicole M.
    Carter, Hannah E.
    Kularatna, Sanjeewa
    Borg, David N.
    Brain, David C.
    Tariq, Amina
    Abell, Bridget
    Blythe, Robin
    McPhail, Steven M.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2023, 30 (06) : 1205 - 1218
  • [28] Using Electronic Health Record-Based Clinical Decision Support to Provide Social Risk-Informed Care in Community Health Centers: Protocol for the Design and Assessment of a Clinical Decision Support Tool
    Gold, Rachel
    Sheppler, Christina
    Hessler, Danielle
    Bunce, Arwen
    Cottrell, Erika
    Yosuf, Nadia
    Pisciotta, Maura
    Gunn, Rose
    Leo, Michael
    Gottlieb, Laura
    JMIR RESEARCH PROTOCOLS, 2021, 10 (10):
  • [29] Impact of Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) Coupled With Clinical Decision Support (CDS) on Radiologic Services
    Almanaa, Mansour
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2024, 16 (09)
  • [30] The Impact of Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) on Physicians: A Scoping Review
    Muhiyaddin, Raghad
    Abd-Alrazaq, Alaa A.
    Househ, Mowafa
    Alam, Tanvir
    Shah, Zubair
    IMPORTANCE OF HEALTH INFORMATICS IN PUBLIC HEALTH DURING A PANDEMIC, 2020, 272 : 470 - 473