Cook David A, Sorensen Kristi J, Linderbaum Jane A, Pencille Laurie J, Rhodes Deborah J
Knowledge Delivery Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Mayo Clinic Online Learning, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Jul 1;24(4):754-761. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocx002.
To better understand clinician information needs and learning opportunities by exploring the use of best-practice algorithms across different training levels and specialties.
We developed interactive online algorithms (care process models [CPMs]) that integrate current guidelines, recent evidence, and local expertise to represent cross-disciplinary best practices for managing clinical problems. We reviewed CPM usage logs from January 2014 to June 2015 and compared usage across specialty and provider type.
During the study period, 4009 clinicians (2014 physicians in practice, 1117 resident physicians, and 878 nurse practitioners/physician assistants [NP/PAs]) viewed 140 CPMs a total of 81 764 times. Usage varied from 1 to 809 views per person, and from 9 to 4615 views per CPM. Residents and NP/PAs viewed CPMs more often than practicing physicians. Among 2742 users with known specialties, generalists ( N = 1397) used CPMs more often (mean 31.8, median 7 views) than specialists ( N = 1345; mean 6.8, median 2; P < .0001). The topics used by specialists largely aligned with topics within their specialties. The top 20% of available CPMs (28/140) collectively accounted for 61% of uses. In all, 2106 clinicians (52%) returned to the same CPM more than once (average 7.8 views per topic; median 4, maximum 195). Generalists revisited topics more often than specialists (mean 8.8 vs 5.1 views per topic; P < .0001).
CPM usage varied widely across topics, specialties, and individual clinicians. Frequently viewed and recurrently viewed topics might warrant special attention. Specialists usually view topics within their specialty and may have unique information needs.
通过探索不同培训水平和专业领域中最佳实践算法的使用情况,更好地了解临床医生的信息需求和学习机会。
我们开发了交互式在线算法(护理流程模型[CPM]),整合了当前指南、最新证据和当地专业知识,以呈现管理临床问题的跨学科最佳实践。我们回顾了2014年1月至2015年6月的CPM使用记录,并比较了不同专业和提供者类型的使用情况。
在研究期间,4009名临床医生(2014名执业医生、1117名住院医生和878名执业护士/医师助理[NP/PA])共81764次查看了140个CPM。每人的使用次数从1次到809次不等,每个CPM的使用次数从9次到4615次不等。住院医生和NP/PA查看CPM的频率高于执业医生。在2742名已知专业的用户中,全科医生(N = 1397)使用CPM的频率更高(平均31.8次,中位数7次),高于专科医生(N = 1345;平均6.8次,中位数2次;P <.0001)。专科医生使用的主题在很大程度上与他们专业领域内的主题一致。可用CPM中排名前20%(28/140)的CPM总共占使用量的61%。共有2106名临床医生(52%)不止一次返回查看同一个CPM(每个主题平均7.8次查看;中位数4次,最多195次)。全科医生比专科医生更频繁地重新查看主题(每个主题平均8.8次查看对5.1次查看;P <.0001)。
CPM的使用在主题、专业和个体临床医生之间差异很大。经常查看和反复查看的主题可能需要特别关注。专科医生通常查看其专业领域内的主题,可能有独特的信息需求。