Alain Mayhew

Effect of point-of-care computer reminders on physician behaviour: a systematic review

Background: The opportunity to improve care using computer reminders is one of the main incentives for implementing sophisticated clinical information systems. We conducted a systematic review to quantify the expected magnitude of improvements in processes of care from computer reminders delivered to clinicians during their routine activities. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases (to July 2008) and scanned the bibliographies of retrieved articles. We included studies in our review if they used a randomized or quasi-randomized design to evaluate improvements in processes or outcomes of care from computer reminders delivered to physicians during routine electronic ordering or charting activities. Results: Among the 28 trials (reporting 32 comparisons) included in our study, we found that computer reminders improved adherence to processes of care by a median of 4.2% (interquartile range [IQR] 0.8%–18.8%). Using the best outcome from each study, we found that the median improvement was 5.6% (IQR 2.0%–19.2%). A minority of studies reported larger effects; however, no study characteristic or reminder feature significantly predicted the magnitude of effect except in one institution, where a well-developed, “homegrown” clinical information system achieved larger improvements than in all other studies (median 16.8% [IQR 8.7%–26.0%] v. 3.0% [IQR 0.5%–11.5%]; p = 0.04). A trend toward larger improvements was seen for reminders that required users to enter a response (median 12.9% [IQR 2.7%–22.8%] v. 2.7% [IQR 0.6%–5.6%]; p = 0.09). Interpretation: Computer reminders produced much smaller improvements than those generally expected from the implementation of computerized order entry and electronic medical record systems. Further research is required to identify features of reminder systems consistently associated with clinically worthwhile improvements.

Economic evaluation of cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review.

Background Economic evaluation is an important tool in the evaluation of competing healthcare interventions. Little is known about the economic benefits of different cardiac rehabilitation program delivery models. Design The goal of this study was to review and evaluate the methodological quality of published economic evaluations of cardiac rehabilitation services. Methods Electronic databases were searched for English language evaluations (trials, modeling studies) of the economic impact of cardiac rehabilitation. A review of study characteristics and methodological quality was completed using standardized tools. All costs are adjusted to 2004 US dollars. Results Fifteen economic evaluations were identified which met eligibility criteria but which displayed wide variation in the use of comparators, evaluation type, perspective and design. Evidence to support the cost-effectiveness of supervised cardiac rehabilitation in myocardial infarction and heart failure patients was identified. The range of cost per life year gained was estimated as from

Knowledge for knowledge translation: The role of the Cochrane Collaboration

2193 to

The Rx for Change database: a first-in-class tool for optimal prescribing and medicines use

28193 and from -

Management of patients with mild aortic stenosis undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

668 to

Development of training for medicines-oriented policymakers to apply evidence

16118 per quality adjusted life year gained. The level of evidence supporting the economic value of home-based cardiac rehabilitation interventions is limited to partial economic analyses. Conclusions Evidence to support the cost-effectiveness of supervised cardiac rehabilitation compared with usual care in myocardial infarction and heart failure was identified. Further trials are required to support the cost-effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation in cardiac patients who have under gone revascularization. The literature evaluating home-based and alternative delivery models of cardiac rehabilitation was insufficient to draw conclusions about their relative cost-effectiveness. The overall quality of published economic evaluations of cardiac rehabilitation is poor and further well-designed trials are required.

Improving surgical practice - a systematic review of effective education strategies to improve surgical technical skills in operative procedures

&NA; Knowledge‐translation (KT) activities, including continuing education, should be informed by the totality of available research evidence. Systematic reviews are a generic methodology used to synthesize evidence from a broad range of research methods addressing different questions. Over the past decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the availability of systematic reviews that could support KT activities. However, the conduct of systematic reviews is technically challenging, and it is not surprising that the quality of available reviews is variable. In addition, unless attempts are made to update systematic reviews, they rapidly become out of date. The Cochrane Collaboration is a unique, worldwide, not‐for‐profit organization that aims to help people make well‐informed decisions about all forms of health care by preparing, maintaining, and promoting the accessibility of systematic reviews of the effects of health care interventions. Globally, over 13, 000 consumers, clinicians, policymakers, and researchers are involved with The Cochrane Collaboration and have to date produced over 2, 500 systematic reviews that can be used to inform KT activities. The Cochrane Collaboration publishes its reviews quarterly in The Cochrane Library. Cochrane reviews have been used to develop a number of KT‐derivative products for professionals, consumers, and policymakers. Whereas most Cochrane Review groups focus on specific clinical areas, the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group undertakes reviews of interventions to improve health care delivery and health care systems, including reviews of different KT activities. We summarize the activities of The Cochrane Collaboration and how these can contribute to KT activities.

The effects of on-screen, point of care computer reminders on processes and outcomes of care

BackgroundGlobally, suboptimal prescribing practices and medication errors are common. Guidance to health professionals and consumers alone is not sufficient to optimise behaviours, therefore strategies to promote evidence-based decision making and practice, such as decision support tools or reminders, are important. The literature in this area is growing, but is of variable quality and dispersed across sources, which makes it difficult to identify, access, and assess. To overcome these problems, by synthesizing and evaluating the data from systematic reviews, we have developed Rx for Change to provide a comprehensive, online database of the evidence for strategies to improve drug prescribing and use.MethodsWe use reliable and valid methods to search and screen the literature, and to appraise and analyse the evidence from relevant systematic reviews. We then present the findings in an online format which allows users to easily access pertinent information related to prescribing and medicines use. The database is a result of the collaboration between the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) and two Cochrane review groups.ResultsTo capture the body of evidence on interventions to improve prescribing and medicines use, we conduct comprehensive and regular searches in multiple databases, and hand-searches of relevant journals. We screen articles to identify relevant systematic reviews, and include them if they are of moderate or high methodological quality. Two researchers screen, assess quality, and extract data on demographic details, intervention characteristics, and outcome data. We report the results of our analysis of each systematic review using a standardised quantitative and qualitative format. Rx for Change currently contains over 200 summarised reviews, structured in a multi-level format. The reviews included in the database are diverse, covering various settings, conditions, or diseases and targeting a range of professional and consumer behaviors.ConclusionsRx for Change is a novel database that synthesizes current research evidence about the effects of interventions to improve drug prescribing practices and medicines use.

Interventions to improve outpatient referrals from primary care to secondary care

BACKGROUND The management of mild aortic stenosis during coronary artery bypass grafting remains controversial. METHODS We reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients between January 1, 1977, and December 31, 1994, to identify 51 patients with mild aortic stenosis who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (group A), and 19 patients with mild aortic stenosis who underwent combined coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement (group B). Patients with more than moderate aortic regurgitation were excluded. Preoperative angiograms were reviewed to assess the severity of calcification and restricted mobility of the aortic cusps. RESULTS In group A there were 11 deaths and 8 subsequent aortic valve replacements; in group B there were 5 deaths and 3 prosthetic valve-related complications. There was no difference in event-free survival between the two groups after adjusting for the difference in age. Among group A patients, the initial transvalvular gradient (p = 0.0005) and aortic valvular calcification (p = 0.06) identified patients who demonstrated progression to severe aortic stenosis during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Our data suggest that routine aortic valve replacement during coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with mild aortic stenosis is not indicated, but concomitant aortic valve replacement may be appropriate in patients with higher transvalvular gradients and calcified valves.

Age, gender, and urban-rural differences in the correlates of physical activity

BackgroundHealth systems globally promote appropriate prescribing by healthcare providers and safe and effective medicine use by consumers. Rx for Change, a publicly available database, provides access to systematic reviews regarding best practices for prescribing and using medicines. Despite the value of the database for improving prescribing and medicine use, its use remains suboptimal. This study aimed to develop a training program for five medicine-focused organisations in Canada and Australia to facilitate the use and understanding of the Rx for Change database.MethodsFour steps were undertaken: 1) key informant interviews were completed across all organisations to understand the knowledge user perspective; 2) a directed content analysis was completed of the interview transcripts and proposed training was developed; 3) a second round of feedback on the proposed training by knowledge users was gathered; and 4) feedback was integrated to develop the final training.ResultsSixteen key informant interviews with knowledge users were conducted. Themes for training content included the scope of, navigation and strategies for using Rx for Change (generic content) and practical examples on incorporating evidence within their workplace context (tailored content). The final training consisted of an informational video, a 60-minute face-to-face workshop and two post-training reminders.ConclusionsA method of engaging knowledge users in the development of a training program to improve the use of an on-line database of systematic reviews was established and used to design training. Next steps include the delivery and evaluation of the training.