scholarly journals Drug‐related problems identified during medication review before and after the introduction of a clinical decision support system

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 224-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Verdoorn ◽  
H.F. Kwint ◽  
P. Hoogland ◽  
J. Gussekloo ◽  
M.L. Bouvy
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support System ◽  
Medication Review ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Drug Related Problems ◽  
Before And After

119 Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) on Medication-Related Fall Risk: Wishes and Needs of European Physicians

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. iv28-iv33
Author(s):  
Kim Ploegmakers ◽  
Annemiek Linn ◽  
Stephanie Medlock ◽  
Nathalie Van der Velde ◽  
Julia Van Weert
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support System ◽  
Medication Review ◽  
Fall Risk ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Background Medication is the second most important cause of falls in older adults, after mobility impairments. Doctors struggle to withdraw Fall Risk Increasing Drugs (FRIDs). They tend to overestimate the beneficial effect of medication and underestimate the risk of side effects. With an online survey we explored if 1) European doctors want digital support during medication review of older fallers by presentation of a personalized fall risk estimation of a patient and 2) what potential barriers and facilitators exist for the use of a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) that communicates fall risk. Methods We performed online surveys in 10 European countries among 359 European physicians who care for older fallers. 68% of the participants were geriatricians. Results 88% of physicians would like to receive help with performing a medication review. Barriers for usage that were mentioned most frequently were: technical issues (74%), indicating a reason when overriding an alert (62%) and unclear advice (60%). Most important facilitators were if the system: is beneficial to patient care (75%), is user friendly (74%) and fits into the workflow (66%) Conclusion most physicians would like to receive help from a CDSS when performing a medication review. For a successful implementation the barriers and facilitators found must be taken into account during development of the system as well as differences between countries.

1309-P: Utilizing a Clinical Decision Support System for Hypoglycemia Management

Diabetes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1309-P
Author(s):  
JACQUELYN R. GIBBS ◽  
KIMBERLY BERGER ◽  
MERCEDES FALCIGLIA
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision

A Clinical Decision Support System for Assessing the Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases in Diabetic Hemodialysis Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-269
Author(s):  
Tahere Talebi Azad Boni ◽  
Haleh Ayatollahi ◽  
Mostafa Langarizadeh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Cardiovascular Diseases ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
K Value ◽  
Care Plans

Background: One of the greatest challenges in the field of medicine is the increasing burden of chronic diseases, such as diabetes. Diabetes may cause several complications, such as kidney failure which is followed by hemodialysis and an increasing risk of cardiovascular diseases. Objective: The purpose of this research was to develop a clinical decision support system for assessing the risk of cardiovascular diseases in diabetic patients undergoing hemodialysis by using a fuzzy logic approach. Methods: This study was conducted in 2018. Initially, the views of physicians on the importance of assessment parameters were determined by using a questionnaire. The face and content validity of the questionnaire was approved by the experts in the field of medicine. The reliability of the questionnaire was calculated by using the test-retest method (r = 0.89). This system was designed and implemented by using MATLAB software. Then, it was evaluated by using the medical records of diabetic patients undergoing hemodialysis (n=208). Results: According to the physicians' point of view, the most important parameters for assessing the risk of cardiovascular diseases were glomerular filtration, duration of diabetes, age, blood pressure, type of diabetes, body mass index, smoking, and C reactive protein. The system was designed and the evaluation results showed that the values of sensitivity, accuracy, and validity were 85%, 92% and 90%, respectively. The K-value was 0.62. Conclusion: The results of the system were largely similar to the patients’ records and showed that the designed system can be used to help physicians to assess the risk of cardiovascular diseases and to improve the quality of care services for diabetic patients undergoing hemodialysis. By predicting the risk of the disease and classifying patients in different risk groups, it is possible to provide them with better care plans.

Massive transfusion experience, current practice and decision support: A survey of Australian and New Zealand anaesthetists

2021 ◽  
pp. 0310057X2097403
Author(s):  
Brenton J Sanderson ◽  
Jeremy D Field ◽  
Lise J Estcourt ◽  
Erica M Wood ◽  
Enrico W Coiera
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Massive Transfusion ◽  
Clinical Decision Support Systems ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Transfusion Practice

Massive transfusions guided by massive transfusion protocols are commonly used to manage critical bleeding, when the patient is at significant risk of morbidity and mortality, and multiple timely decisions must be made by clinicians. Clinical decision support systems are increasingly used to provide patient-specific recommendations by comparing patient information to a knowledge base, and have been shown to improve patient outcomes. To investigate current massive transfusion practice and the experiences and attitudes of anaesthetists towards massive transfusion and clinical decision support systems, we anonymously surveyed 1000 anaesthetists and anaesthesia trainees across Australia and New Zealand. A total of 228 surveys (23.6%) were successfully completed and 227 were analysed for a 23.3% response rate. Most respondents were involved in massive transfusions infrequently (88.1% managed five or fewer massive transfusion protocols per year) and worked at hospitals which have massive transfusion protocols (89.4%). Massive transfusion management was predominantly limited by timely access to point-of-care coagulation assessment and by competition with other tasks, with trainees reporting more significant limitations compared to specialists. The majority of respondents reported that they were likely, or very likely, both to use (73.1%) and to trust (85%) a clinical decision support system for massive transfusions, with no significant difference between anaesthesia trainees and specialists ( P = 0.375 and P = 0.73, respectively). While the response rate to our survey was poor, there was still a wide range of massive transfusion experience among respondents, with multiple subjective factors identified limiting massive transfusion practice. We identified several potential design features and barriers to implementation to assist with the future development of a clinical decision support system for massive transfusion, and overall wide support for a clinical decision support system for massive transfusion among respondents.

scholarly journals An Evolutionary Belief Rule-Based Clinical Decision Support System to Predict COVID-19 Severity under Uncertainty

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (13) ◽  
pp. 5810
Author(s):  
Faisal Ahmed ◽  
Mohammad Shahadat Hossain ◽  
Raihan Ul Islam ◽  
Karl Andersson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision Support System ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Experimental Result ◽  
Rule Base ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Belief Rule Base

Accurate and rapid identification of the severe and non-severe COVID-19 patients is necessary for reducing the risk of overloading the hospitals, effective hospital resource utilization, and minimizing the mortality rate in the pandemic. A conjunctive belief rule-based clinical decision support system is proposed in this paper to identify critical and non-critical COVID-19 patients in hospitals using only three blood test markers. The experts’ knowledge of COVID-19 is encoded in the form of belief rules in the proposed method. To fine-tune the initial belief rules provided by COVID-19 experts using the real patient’s data, a modified differential evolution algorithm that can solve the constraint optimization problem of the belief rule base is also proposed in this paper. Several experiments are performed using 485 COVID-19 patients’ data to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed system. Experimental result shows that, after optimization, the conjunctive belief rule-based system achieved the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.954, 0.923, and 0.959, respectively, while for disjunctive belief rule base, they are 0.927, 0.769, and 0.948. Moreover, with a 98.85% AUC value, our proposed method shows superior performance than the four traditional machine learning algorithms: LR, SVM, DT, and ANN. All these results validate the effectiveness of our proposed method. The proposed system will help the hospital authorities to identify severe and non-severe COVID-19 patients and adopt optimal treatment plans in pandemic situations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document