Tierney William M, Overhage J Marc, Murray Michael D, Harris Lisa E, Zhou Xiao-Hua, Eckert George J, Smith Faye E, Nienaber Nancy, McDonald Clement J, Wolinsky Fredric D
Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, M200-OPW, Wishard Memorial Hospital, 1001 West 10th St., Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
Health Serv Res. 2005 Apr;40(2):477-97. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00368.x.
Translation of evidence-based guidelines into clinical practice has been inconsistent. We performed a randomized, controlled trial of guideline-based care suggestions delivered to physicians when writing orders on computer workstations.
Inner-city academic general internal medicine practice.
Randomized, controlled trial of 246 physicians (25 percent faculty general internists, 75 percent internal medicine residents) and 20 outpatient pharmacists. We enrolled 706 of their primary care patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Care suggestions concerning drugs and monitoring were delivered to a random half of the physicians and pharmacists when writing orders or filling prescriptions using computer workstations. A 2 x 2 factorial randomization of practice sessions and pharmacists resulted in four groups of patients: physician intervention, pharmacist intervention, both interventions, and controls. DATA EXTRACTION/COLLECTION METHODS: Adherence to the guidelines and clinical activity was assessed using patients' electronic medical records. Health-related quality of life, medication adherence, and satisfaction with care were assessed using telephone questionnaires.
During their year in the study, patients made an average of five scheduled primary care visits. There were no differences between groups in adherence to the care suggestions, generic or condition-specific quality of life, satisfaction with physicians or pharmacists, medication compliance, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations. Physicians receiving the intervention had significantly higher total health care costs. Physician attitudes toward guidelines were mixed.
Care suggestions shown to physicians and pharmacists on computer workstations had no effect on the delivery or outcomes of care for patients with reactive airways disease.
将循证指南转化为临床实践的情况一直参差不齐。我们进行了一项随机对照试验,研究在医生通过计算机工作站开医嘱时提供基于指南的护理建议的效果。
市中心的学术性普通内科诊所。
对246名医生(25%为普通内科教员,75%为内科住院医师)和20名门诊药剂师进行随机对照试验。我们纳入了他们的706名患有哮喘或慢性阻塞性肺疾病的初级保健患者。在医生通过计算机工作站开医嘱或药剂师配药时,随机抽取一半的医生和药剂师,向他们提供有关药物和监测的护理建议。对诊疗环节和药剂师进行2×2析因随机分组,从而形成四组患者:医生干预组、药剂师干预组、两组均干预组和对照组。数据提取/收集方法:利用患者的电子病历评估对指南的遵循情况和临床活动。通过电话问卷调查评估与健康相关的生活质量、用药依从性以及对护理的满意度。
在参与研究的一年中,患者平均进行了五次定期初级保健就诊。在对护理建议的遵循情况、通用或特定疾病的生活质量、对医生或药剂师的满意度、用药依从性、急诊就诊次数或住院率方面,各组之间没有差异。接受干预的医生的总医疗费用显著更高。医生对指南的态度不一。
在计算机工作站向医生和药剂师展示护理建议,对反应性气道疾病患者的护理提供或护理结果没有影响。