对医院计算机化医嘱录入(CPOE)系统中干预性用药处方提醒改变开处方者行为并提高患者安全有效性的系统评价。
A systematic review of the effectiveness of interruptive medication prescribing alerts in hospital CPOE systems to change prescriber behavior and improve patient safety.
作者信息
Page N, Baysari M T, Westbrook J I
机构信息
Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Australia.
Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Australia; St Vincent's Clinical School, University of NSW, Australia.
出版信息
Int J Med Inform. 2017 Sep;105:22-30. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.05.011. Epub 2017 May 27.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the evidence of the effectiveness of different categories of interruptive medication prescribing alerts to change prescriber behavior and/or improve patient outcomes in hospital computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant articles published between January 2000 and February 2016. Studies were included if they compared the outcomes of automatic, interruptive medication prescribing alert/s to a control/comparison group to determine alert effectiveness.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies describing 32 alerts classified into 11 alert categories were identified. The most common alert categories studied were drug-condition interaction (n=6), drug-drug interaction alerts (n=6) and corollary order alerts (n=6). All 23 papers investigated the effect of the intervention alert on at least one outcome measure of prescriber behavior. Just over half of the studies (53%, n=17) reported a statistically significant beneficial effect from the intervention alert; 34% (n=11) reported no statistically significant effect, and 6% (n=2) reported a significant detrimental effect. Two studies also evaluated the effect of alerts on patient outcome measures; neither finding that patient outcomes significantly improved following alert implementation (6%, n=2). The greatest volume of evidence relates to three alert categories: drug-condition, drug-drug and corollary order alerts. Of these, drug-condition alerts had the greatest number of studies reporting positive effects (five out of six studies). Only two of six studies of drug-drug interaction and one of six of corollary alerts reported positive benefits.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The current evidence-base does not show a clear indication that particular categories of alerts are more effective than others. While the majority of alert categories were shown to improve outcomes in some studies, there were also many cases where outcomes did not improve. This lack of evidence hinders decisions about the amount and type of decision support that should be integrated into CPOE systems to increase safety while reducing the risk of alert fatigue. Virtually no studies have sought to investigate the impact on changes to prescriber behavior and outcomes overall when alerts from multiple categories are incorporated within the same system.
目的
评估不同类型的干预性用药处方警报在医院计算机化医嘱录入(CPOE)系统中改变开处方者行为和/或改善患者结局方面有效性的证据。
方法
检索PubMed、Embase、CINAHL和Cochrane图书馆,查找2000年1月至2016年2月发表的相关文章。如果研究将自动干预性用药处方警报的结果与对照组/比较组进行比较以确定警报有效性,则纳入该研究。
结果
共识别出23项描述32种警报的研究,这些警报分为11个警报类别。研究最多的警报类别是药物-疾病相互作用(n = 6)、药物-药物相互作用警报(n = 6)和辅助医嘱警报(n = 6)。所有23篇论文都研究了干预警报对开处方者行为至少一项结局指标的影响。略超过一半的研究(53%,n = 17)报告干预警报有统计学显著的有益效果;34%(n = 11)报告无统计学显著效果,6%(n = 2)报告有显著有害效果。两项研究还评估了警报对患者结局指标的影响;均未发现警报实施后患者结局有显著改善(6%,n = 2)。证据最多的是三个警报类别:药物-疾病、药物-药物和辅助医嘱警报。其中,药物-疾病警报报告有积极效果的研究数量最多(六项研究中有五项)。药物-药物相互作用的六项研究中只有两项以及辅助医嘱警报的六项研究中只有一项报告有积极益处。
讨论与结论
当前的证据基础并未明确表明特定类别的警报比其他警报更有效。虽然大多数警报类别在一些研究中显示能改善结局,但也有许多情况结局并未改善。这种证据不足阻碍了关于应纳入CPOE系统以提高安全性同时降低警报疲劳风险的决策支持数量和类型的决策。实际上,几乎没有研究试图调查当同一系统中纳入多个类别的警报时对开处方者行为和总体结局变化的影响。