Cynthia D. Spurr

Ten Commandments for Effective Clinical Decision Support: Making the Practice of Evidence-based Medicine a Reality

While evidence-based medicine has increasingly broad-based support in health care, it remains difficult to get physicians to actually practice it. Across most domains in medicine, practice has lagged behind knowledge by at least several years. The authors believe that the key tools for closing this gap will be information systems that provide decision support to users at the time they make decisions, which should result in improved quality of care. Furthermore, providers make many errors, and clinical decision support can be useful for finding and preventing such errors. Over the last eight years the authors have implemented and studied the impact of decision support across a broad array of domains and have found a number of common elements important to success. The goal of this report is to discuss these lessons learned in the interest of informing the efforts of others working to make the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality.

A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care

Electronic medical record systems improve the quality of patient care and decrease medical errors, but their financial effects have not been as well documented. The purpose of this study was to estimate the net financial benefit or cost of implementing electronic medical record systems in primary care. We performed a cost-benefit study to analyze the financial effects of electronic medical record systems in ambulatory primary care settings from the perspective of the health care organization. Data were obtained from studies at our institution and from the published literature. The reference strategy for comparisons was the traditional paper-based medical record. The primary outcome measure was the net financial benefit or cost per primary care physician for a 5-year period. The estimated net benefit from using an electronic medical record for a 5-year period was 86,400 US dollars per provider. Benefits accrue primarily from savings in drug expenditures, improved utilization of radiology tests, better capture of charges, and decreased billing errors. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the model was most sensitive to the proportion of patients whose care was capitated; the net benefit varied from a low of 8400 US dollars to a high of 140,100 US dollars . A five-way sensitivity analysis with the most pessimistic and optimistic assumptions showed results ranging from a 2300 US dollars net cost to a 330,900 US dollars net benefit. Implementation of an electronic medical record system in primary care can result in a positive financial return on investment to the health care organization. The magnitude of the return is sensitive to several key factors.

The Brigham integrated computing system (BICS): advanced clinical systems in an academic hospital environment

The Brigham integrated computing system (BICS) provides nearly all clinical, administrative, and financial computing services to Brigham and Womens Hospital, an academic tertiary-care hospital in Boston. The BICS clinical information system includes a very wide range of data and applications, including results review, longitudinal medical records, provider order entry, critical pathway management, operating-room dynamic scheduling, critical-event detection and altering, dynamic coverage lists, automated inpatient summaries, and an online reference library. BICS design emphasizes direct physician interaction and extensive clinical decision support. Impact studies have demonstrated significant value of the system in preventing adverse events and in saving costs, particularly for medications.

Comparison of time spent writing orders on paper with computerized physician order entry.

Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) has been shown to improve quality, and to reduce resource utilization, but most available data suggest that it takes longer to enter orders using CPOE. We had previously implemented a CPOE system, and elected to evaluate its impact on physician time in the new setting. To do this, we performed a prospective study using random reminder methodology. Key findings were that interns spent 9.0% of their time ordering with CPOE, compared to 2.1% before, although CPOE saved them an additional 2% of time, so that the net difference was 5% of their total time. However, this is counterbalanced by decreased time for other personnel such as nursing and pharmacy, and by the quality and efficiency changes. We conclude that while CPOE has many benefits, it represents a major process change, and organizations must factor this in when they implement it.