There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
<div class="section">
<a class="named-anchor" id="S1">
<!--
named anchor
-->
</a>
<h5 class="section-title" id="d9467184e191">Objective</h5>
<p id="P1">Evaluate the impact of evidence-based clinical decision support tools
integrated directly into provider workflow in the electronic health record
on utilization of CT brain, c-spine and pulmonary embolism (PE).
</p>
</div><div class="section">
<a class="named-anchor" id="S2">
<!--
named anchor
-->
</a>
<h5 class="section-title" id="d9467184e196">Methods</h5>
<p id="P2">Validated, well accepted scoring tools for head injury, c-spine
injury and pulmonary embolism were embedded into the electronic health
record in a manner minimally disruptive to provider workflow. This was a
longitudinal, before/after study in 5 emergency departments in a healthcare
system with a common electronic health record. Attending ED physicians
practicing during the entire study period were included. The main outcome
measure was proportion of CTs ordered by provider (total number of CT scans
of a given type divided by total patients seen by that provider) in
aggregate in the pre- and post-intervention period.
</p>
</div><div class="section">
<a class="named-anchor" id="S3">
<!--
named anchor
-->
</a>
<h5 class="section-title" id="d9467184e201">Results</h5>
<p id="P3">There were 235,858 total patient visits analyzed in this study with
an absolute decrease of 6106 CT scan ordering for the three studies. Across
all sites, there was greater than 6% decrease in utilization of CT
brain and CT c-spine [(−10%, 95% CI
(−13%, −7%); p < 0.001);
(−6%, 95% CI (−11%,
−1%); p = 0.03) respectively]. The use of CT
PE also decreased but was not significant (−2%,
95%CI (−9%, +5%); p = 0.42).
For all CT types, high utilizers in the pre-period decreased usage over
14% in the post-period with CT brain (−18%,
95% CI (−22%, −15%), p < 0.001),
CT c-spine (−14%, 95% CI (−20%,
−8%), p = 0.001) and CT PE (−23%,
95% CI (−31%, −14%), p < 0.001).
For all 3 studies, the average utilizers did not change their usage
practices. For CT brain, the low utilizers also did not increase usage but
for CT c-spine and CT PE usage was increased [(+29%,
95% CI (10%, 52%) p = 0.003);
(+46%, 95% CI (26%, 70%), p <
0.001) respectively].
</p>
</div><div class="section">
<a class="named-anchor" id="S4">
<!--
named anchor
-->
</a>
<h5 class="section-title" id="d9467184e206">Conclusion</h5>
<p id="P4">Embedded clinical decision support is associated with decreased
overall utilization of high cost imaging, especially among higher utilizers.
It also affected low utilizers, increasing their usage consistent with
improved adherence to guidelines, but this effect did not offset the overall
decreased utilization for CT brain or CT c-spine. Thus, integrating CDS into
the provider workflow promotes usage of validated tools across providers,
which can standardize the delivery of care and improve compliance with
evidence-based guidelines.
</p>
</div>
Two decision rules for indications of computed tomography (CT) in patients with minor head injury, the Canadian CT Head Rule (CCHR) and the New Orleans Criteria (NOC), suggest that CT scanning may be restricted to patients with certain risk factors, which would lead to important reductions in the use of CT scans. To validate and compare these 2 published decision rules in Dutch patients with head injuries. A prospective multicenter study conducted between February 11, 2002, and August 31, 2004, in 4 university hospitals in the Netherlands of 3181 consecutive adult patients with minor head injury who presented with a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 13 to 14 or with a GCS score of 15 and at least 1 risk factor. Primary outcome was any neurocranial traumatic finding on CT scan. Secondary outcomes were neurosurgical intervention and clinically important CT findings. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated for each outcome for the CCHR and the NOC, using both rules as originally derived and also as adapted to apply to an expanded patient population. Of 3181 patients with a GCS score of 13 to 15, neurosurgical intervention was performed in 17 patients (0.5%); neurocranial traumatic CT findings were present in 312 patients (9.8%). Sensitivity for neurosurgical intervention was 100% for both the CCHR and the NOC. The NOC had a higher sensitivity for neurocranial traumatic findings and for clinically important findings (97.7%-99.4%) than did the CCHR (83.4%-87.2%). Specificities were very low for the NOC (3.0%-5.6%) and higher for the CCHR (37.2%-39.7%). The estimated potential reduction in CT scans for patients with minor head injury would be 3.0% for the adapted NOC and 37.3% for the adapted CCHR. For patients with minor head injury and a GCS score of 13 to 15, the CCHR has a lower sensitivity than the NOC for neurocranial traumatic or clinically important CT findings, but would identify all cases requiring neurosurgical intervention, and has greater potential for reducing the use of CT scans.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.