Key result
Implementation of an electronic clinical decision support alert did not significantly change the level (P=0.1651) or trend (P=0.8256) of anticoagulation rates in high-risk atrial fibrillation patients.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to measure the effect of clinical decision support on anticoagulation rates in high-stroke-risk outpatients with AFib or AFlut and to assess provider response.
Does clinical decision support (CDS) improve anticoagulation rates in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter at high stroke risk?
Observational
Does clinical decision support (CDS) improve anticoagulation rates in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter at high stroke risk?
Effect estimate: change in level β 0.60%, change in trend β -0.01%
p-value: p=0.1651 (level), 0.8256 (trend)
Implementation of an electronic health record clinical decision support alert did not significantly increase anticoagulation rates in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation.
CDS alerts were not associated with higher anticoagulation rates in high-risk AF; should not change practice and leaves open need for refined tools.
PURPOSE: To measure the effect of clinical decision support (CDS) on anticoagulation rates in patients with atrial fibrillation (AFib) or atrial flutter (AFlut) at high stroke risk and receiving care in outpatient settings, and to assess provider response to CDS. METHODS: This observational, quasi-experimental, interrupted time series study utilized electronic health record data at a large integrated delivery network in Texas from April to November 2020. CDS consisted of an electronic Best Practice Advisory (BPA)/alert (Epic Systems Corporation, Verona, WI) with links to 2 AFib order sets displayed to providers in outpatient settings caring for non-anticoagulated patients with AFib and elevated CHA2DS2VASc scores. Weekly outpatient anticoagulation rates were assessed in patients with high stroke risk before and after implementation of CDS. Alert actions and acknowledgment reasons were evaluated descriptively. RESULTS: Mean (SD) weekly counts of eligible patients were 8,917 (566) before and 8,881 (811) after implementation. Weekly anticoagulation rates increased during the pre-BPA study period (β1 = 0.07%; SE, 0.02%; P = 0.0062); however, there were no significant changes in the level (β2 = 0.60%; SE, 0.42%; P = 0.1651) or trend (β3 = -0.01%; SE, 0.05%; P = 0.8256) of anticoagulation rates associated with CDS implementation. In encounters with the BPA/alert displayed (n = 17,654), acknowledgment reasons were provided in 4,473 (25.3%) of the encounters, with prescribers most commonly citing bleeding risk (n = 1,327, 7.5%) and fall risk (n = 855, 4.8%). CONCLUSION: There was a significant trend of increasing anticoagulation rates during the pre-BPA period, with no significant change in trend during the post-BPA period relative to the pre-BPA period.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Osterland et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter at high stroke risk. Clinical decision support (CDS) alert vs. Pre-implementation period was evaluated on Weekly outpatient anticoagulation rates (change in level β 0.60%, change in trend β -0.01%, p=0.1651 (level), 0.8256 (trend)). Implementation of an electronic clinical decision support alert did not significantly change the level (P=0.1651) or trend (P=0.8256) of anticoagulation rates in high-risk atrial fibrillation patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: