36
IRUS TotalDownloads
Altmetric
A systematic review of clinical decision support systems for antimicrobial management: Are we failing to investigate these interventions appropriately?
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
For AA publication + CLM-16-11126 (2).docx | Accepted version | 547.89 kB | Microsoft Word | View/Open |
1-s2.0-S1198743X17301258-main.pdf | Published version | 505.16 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Title: | A systematic review of clinical decision support systems for antimicrobial management: Are we failing to investigate these interventions appropriately? |
Authors: | Rawson, T Moore, L Hernandez, B Charani, E Castro Sanchez, E Herrero, P Hayhoe, B Hope, W Georgiou, P Holmes, A |
Item Type: | Journal Article |
Abstract: | Objectives Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) for antimicrobial management can support clinicians to optimise antimicrobial therapy. We reviewed all original literature (qualitative and quantitative) to understand the current scope of CDSS for antimicrobial management and analyse existing methods used to evaluate and report such systems. Method PRISMA guidelines were followed. Medline, EMBASE, HMIC Health and Management, and Global Health databases were searched from 1st January 1980 to 31st October 2015. All primary research studies describing CDSS for antimicrobial management in adults in primary or secondary care were included. For qualitative studies, thematic synthesis was performed. Quality was assessed using Integrated quality Criteria for the Review Of Multiple Study designs (ICROMS) criteria. CDSS reporting was assessed against a reporting framework for behaviour change intervention implementation. Results Fifty-eight original articles were included describing 38 independent CDSS. The majority of systems target antimicrobial prescribing (29/38;76%), are platforms integrated with electronic medical records (28/38;74%), and have rules based infrastructure providing decision support (29/38;76%). On evaluation against the intervention reporting framework, CDSS studies fail to report consideration of the non-expert, end-user workflow. They have narrow focus, such as antimicrobial selection, and use proxy outcome measures. Engagement with CDSS by clinicians was poor. Conclusion Greater consideration of the factors that drive non-expert decision making must be considered when designing CDSS interventions. Future work must aim to expand CDSS beyond simply selecting appropriate antimicrobials with clear and systematic reporting frameworks for CDSS interventions developed to address current gaps identified in the reporting of evidence. |
Issue Date: | 6-Mar-2017 |
Date of Acceptance: | 27-Feb-2017 |
URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/45082 |
DOI: | https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2017.02.028 |
ISSN: | 1469-0691 |
Publisher: | Elsevier |
Start Page: | 524 |
End Page: | 532 |
Journal / Book Title: | Clinical Microbiology and Infection |
Volume: | 23 |
Issue: | 8 |
Copyright Statement: | © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) |
Sponsor/Funder: | National Institute for Health Research National Institute for Health Research National Institute for Health Research National Institute for Health Research |
Funder's Grant Number: | HPRU-2012-10047 HPRU-2012-10047 II-LA-0214-20008 II-LA-0214-20008 |
Keywords: | Science & Technology Life Sciences & Biomedicine Infectious Diseases Microbiology Antimicrobial resistance Antimicrobial stewardship Decision algorithms Electronic support ACUTE RESPIRATORY-INFECTIONS CLUSTER RANDOMIZED-TRIAL INTENSIVE-CARE-UNIT ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS URINARY-TRACT-INFECTIONS ANTIBIOTIC USE HOSPITALIZED-PATIENTS APPROVAL SYSTEM TIME-SERIES IMPROVE 1103 Clinical Sciences |
Publication Status: | Published |
Appears in Collections: | Electrical and Electronic Engineering Department of Medicine (up to 2019) Faculty of Engineering |