Division of General Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus.
Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Jan 4;5(1):e2143590. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.43590.
Guidelines recommend using telehealth for hypertension management, but insufficient evidence is available to guide strategies for incorporating telehealth data into clinical practice.
To describe how primary care teams responded to elevated remote blood pressure (BP) alerts in the electronic health record (EHR) in a randomized clinical trial of BP telemonitoring conducted in routine practice settings.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study reviewed EHR documentation from May 8, 2018, to August 9, 2019, in a single urban academic family practice site. Primary care teams comprising 28 attending physicians and nurse practitioners, residents, and nurses cared for 162 patients in a text-based clinical trial of remote BP monitoring remote BP monitoring. Data were analyzed from October 21, 2019, to April 30, 2021.
Clinicians received a direct message in their EHR inbox when patients submitted at least 3 elevated BP readings.
Categories and frequencies of clinician action, created via review of EHR-documented clinician responses to EHR alerts by 2 physicians.
Patients in this study (n = 162) were predominantly female (111 [68.5%]) and Black or African American (146 [90.1%]), whereas attending physicians (n = 21) were predominantly female (13 [61.9%]) and non-Hispanic White (19 [90.5%]) with a mean (SD) age of 51.6 (11.1) years. Five hundred fifty-two alerts fell into 12 categories of clinical actions. Clinicians acted on 343 alerts (62.1%). Common remote activities were to reconcile medications and assess adherence (120 of 552 alerts [21.7%]) and verify BP measurement technique (65 of 552 alerts [11.8%]). Clinicians also commonly requested appointments (120 of 552 alerts [21.7%]) and/or saw the patient in a subsequent office visit (114 of 552 alerts [20.7%]). Ninety-six alerts (17.4%) resulted in medication changes; half of these changes were remote (48 of 96 [50.0%]), and the other half were visit-based. For 209 of 552 alerts (37.9%), no changes were made to the care plan, typically without documenting clinical rationale (196 of 209 instances [93.8%]). Exploratory EHR review was used to infer potential clinical rationale for 106 (54.1%) of such cases, but there was insufficient information for the remaining 90 (45.9%).
These findings suggest that EHR alerts for elevated BP during remote monitoring were effective in prompting a mix of remote and office-based management. It was also common for the plan of care to remain unchanged, possibly suggesting need for more refined alerts and improved clinician support.
指南建议将远程医疗用于高血压管理,但缺乏足够的证据来指导将远程医疗数据纳入临床实践的策略。
在常规实践环境中进行的血压远程监测的随机临床试验中,描述初级保健团队如何应对电子健康记录(EHR)中升高的远程血压(BP)警报。
设计、地点和参与者:这项回顾性队列研究回顾了 2018 年 5 月 8 日至 2019 年 8 月 9 日在一个单一的城市学术家庭实践点的 EHR 文档。由 28 名主治医生和护士从业人员、住院医生和护士组成的初级保健团队在远程 BP 监测的远程 BP 监测基于文本的临床试验中为 162 名患者提供护理。数据分析于 2019 年 10 月 21 日至 2021 年 4 月 30 日进行。
当患者提交至少 3 次升高的 BP 读数时,临床医生会在他们的 EHR 收件箱中收到一条直接消息。
通过两名医生对 EHR 警报的 EHR 记录的临床反应进行审查,创建了分类和频率的临床操作。
这项研究中的患者(n=162)主要为女性(111 [68.5%])和黑人或非裔美国人(146 [90.1%]),而主治医生(n=21)主要为女性(13 [61.9%])和非西班牙裔白人(19 [90.5%]),平均(SD)年龄为 51.6(11.1)岁。552 次警报分为 12 类临床操作。临床医生对 343 次警报(62.1%)采取了行动。常见的远程活动包括调整药物和评估依从性(552 次警报中的 120 次[21.7%])和验证血压测量技术(552 次警报中的 65 次[11.8%])。临床医生还经常要求预约(552 次警报中的 120 次[21.7%])和/或在随后的就诊中看到患者(552 次警报中的 114 次[20.7%])。96 次警报(17.4%)导致药物变化;其中一半是远程(48 次/96 次[50.0%]),另一半是基于就诊的。对于 552 次警报中的 209 次(37.9%),护理计划没有改变,通常没有记录临床理由(196 次/209 次[93.8%])。使用探索性 EHR 审查推断了 106 次(54.1%)此类情况下的潜在临床理由,但对于其余 90 次(45.9%),信息不足。
这些发现表明,远程监测期间升高的 BP 的 EHR 警报有效促使了远程和基于办公室的管理的混合。护理计划保持不变也很常见,这可能表明需要更精细的警报和更好的临床医生支持。