Department of Economics and Experimental Economics Center, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2021 Mar 8;16(3):e0247270. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247270. eCollection 2021.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services identified unplanned hospital readmissions as a critical healthcare quality and cost problem. Improvements in hospital discharge decision-making and post-discharge care are needed to address the problem. Utilization of clinical decision support (CDS) can improve discharge decision-making but little is known about the empirical significance of two opposing problems that can occur: (1) negligible uptake of CDS by providers or (2) over-reliance on CDS and underuse of other information. This paper reports an experiment where, in addition to electronic medical records (EMR), clinical decision-makers are provided subjective reports by standardized patients, or CDS information, or both. Subjective information, reports of being eager or reluctant for discharge, was obtained during examinations of standardized patients, who are regularly employed in medical education, and in our experiment had been given scripts for the experimental treatments. The CDS tool presents discharge recommendations obtained from econometric analysis of data from de-identified EMR of hospital patients. 38 clinical decision-makers in the experiment, who were third and fourth year medical students, discharged eight simulated patient encounters with an average length of stay 8.1 in the CDS supported group and 8.8 days in the control group. When the recommendation was "Discharge," CDS uptake of "Discharge" recommendation was 20% higher for eager than reluctant patients. Compared to discharge decisions in the absence of patient reports: (i) odds of discharging reluctant standardized patients were 67% lower in the CDS-assisted group and 40% lower in the control (no-CDS) group; whereas (ii) odds of discharging eager standardized patients were 75% higher in the control group and similar in CDS-assisted group. These findings indicate that participants were neither ignoring nor over-relying on CDS.
医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心将计划外的医院再入院确定为一个严重的医疗质量和成本问题。需要改进医院出院决策和出院后护理,以解决这一问题。临床决策支持(CDS)的使用可以改善出院决策,但对于可能出现的两个相反问题的实际意义知之甚少:(1)提供者对 CDS 的接受率微不足道;(2)过度依赖 CDS 和对其他信息的使用不足。本文报告了一项实验,除了电子病历(EMR)之外,临床决策者还可以通过标准化患者获得主观报告,或 CDS 信息,或两者兼而有之。主观信息,即关于出院的渴望或不情愿的报告,是在对标准化患者进行检查时获得的,标准化患者在医学教育中经常被使用,在我们的实验中,他们已经获得了实验治疗的脚本。CDS 工具提供了从去识别的医院患者 EMR 数据的计量经济学分析中获得的出院建议。实验中有 38 名临床决策者,他们是三、四年级的医学生,模拟了 8 次患者就诊,平均住院时间为 8.1 天,在 CDS 支持组,8.8 天在对照组。当建议是“出院”时,对于渴望出院的患者,CDS 对“出院”建议的接受率比不情愿出院的患者高 20%。与没有患者报告的出院决策相比:(i)在 CDS 辅助组,不情愿的标准化患者出院的几率降低了 67%,而在对照组(无 CDS 组)则降低了 40%;而(ii)在对照组中,渴望出院的标准化患者的出院几率增加了 75%,而在 CDS 辅助组中则相似。这些发现表明,参与者既没有忽视也没有过度依赖 CDS。