PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Anthony J Avery

Publications and source records attributed to Anthony J Avery.

13 recordsLinked to original sources

Evaluation and certification of computerized provider order entry systems.

Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) is an application that is used to electronically write physician orders either in the hospital or in the outpatient setting. It is used in about 15% of U.S. Hospitals and a smaller percentage of ambulatory clinics. It is linked with clinical decision support, which provides much of the value of implementing it. A number of studies have assessed the impact of CPOE with respect to a variety of parameters, including costs of care, medication safety, use of guidelines or protocols, and other measures of the effectiveness or quality of care. Most of these studies have been undertaken at CPOE exemplar sites with homegrown clinical information systems. With the increasing implementation of commercial CPOE systems in various settings of care has come evidence that some implementation approaches may not achieve previously published results or may actually cause new errors or even harm. This has lead to new initiatives to evaluate CPOE systems, which have been undertaken by both vendors and other groups who evaluate vendors, focused on CPOE vendor capabilities and effective approaches to implementation that can achieve benefits seen in published studies. In addition, an electronic health record (EHR) vendor certification process is ongoing under the province of the Certification Commission for Health Information Technology (CCHIT) (which includes CPOE) that will affect the purchase and use of these applications by hospitals and clinics and their participation in public and private health insurance programs. Large employers have also joined this focus by developing flight simulation tools to evaluate the capabilities of these CPOE systems once implemented, potentially linking the results of such programs to reimbursement through pay for performance programs. The increasing role of CPOE systems in health care has invited much more scrutiny about the effectiveness of these systems in actual practice which has the potential to improve their ultimate performance.

Certification↗

Medication-related clinical decision support in computerized provider order entry systems: a review.

While medications can improve patients' health, the process of prescribing them is complex and error prone, and medication errors cause many preventable injuries. Computer provider order entry (CPOE) with clinical decision support (CDS), can improve patient safety and lower medication-related costs. To realize the medication-related benefits of CDS within CPOE, one must overcome significant challenges. Healthcare organizations implementing CPOE must understand what classes of CDS their CPOE systems can support, assure that clinical knowledge underlying their CDS systems is reasonable, and appropriately represent electronic patient data. These issues often influence to what extent an institution will succeed with its CPOE implementation and achieve its desired goals. Medication-related decision support is probably best introduced into healthcare organizations in two stages, basic and advanced. Basic decision support includes drug-allergy checking, basic dosing guidance, formulary decision support, duplicate therapy checking, and drug-drug interaction checking. Advanced decision support includes dosing support for renal insufficiency and geriatric patients, guidance for medication-related laboratory testing, drug-pregnancy checking, and drug-disease contraindication checking. In this paper, the authors outline some of the challenges associated with both basic and advanced decision support and discuss how those challenges might be addressed. The authors conclude with summary recommendations for delivering effective medication-related clinical decision support addressed to healthcare organizations, application and knowledge base vendors, policy makers, and researchers.

Contraindications↗

Accounting for the increase in NSAID expenditure: substitution or leakage?

BACKGROUND: National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance stated that a new form of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) (selective COX-2 inhibitors) should only be an option for arthritis patients at high risk of a gastro-intestinal (GI) event. Total expenditure on NSAIDs has risen by 57% over five years, to 247 pounds sterling million in 2004. We assess whether this expenditure increase can be accounted for by substitution--an increased prescribing of two (more expensive) selective COX-2 inhibitors (celecoxib and rofecoxib) and a simultaneous equivalent reduction in the prescribing volume of three (cheaper) older NSAIDs (diclofenac, ibuprofen and naproxen). METHODS: Quarterly prescription data was collated from January 1999 to September 2004. Over this period, the level of correlation between the total prescribing volumes for i) celecoxib and rofecoxib, and ii) diclofenac, ibuprofen, and naproxen were compared, the change in total expenditure on the five NSAIDs was also estimated. The latter was apportioned into that which was estimated to have arisen due to i) substitution, and ii) increased NSAID prescription volume. RESULTS: Total prescription volumes for the two NSAID groups were negatively correlated (r = -0.97, p < 0.001). In the last quarter there were 1.23 million prescriptions for celecoxib and rofecoxib, and 0.46 million fewer prescriptions for naproxen, diclofenac, and ibuprofen (than in the first quarter, when celecoxib and rofecoxib were not prescribed). Total expenditure for the five NSAIDs was 32.7 pounds sterling million higher in the last quarter, than the first, 12.2 pounds sterling million of which was estimated to be due to substitution, and 20.4 pounds sterling million due to increased volume. CONCLUSION: The introduction of celecoxib and rofecoxib was associated with a reduction in the prescription volume for naproxen, diclofenac, and ibuprofen. However, overall quarterly prescription volume for these five NSAIDs increased by 0.76 million, and we estimate that quarterly expenditure increased by 20.4 pounds sterling million more than would have been expected if overall NSAID volume had remained constant. This suggests that the prescription of both celecoxib and rofecoxib may have 'leaked' to population groups who would not previously have received an older NSAID.

Journal Article↗

Views of glaucoma patients on aspects of their treatment: an assessment of patient preference by conjoint analysis.

PURPOSE: To determine by conjoint analysis which factors in the management and treatment of glaucoma were of most importance to patients and to relate these factors to the patient's clinical glaucoma condition. METHODS: An interview-based study was performed. Demographic and visual function data are recorded. Participants completed the Visual Function Questionnaire-25 and ranked 10 hypothetical patient scenarios that contained different risks of moderate visual loss, postoperative complications, long-term blindness, use of topical medication, and glaucoma surgery. Conjoint analysis was performed to determine the relative importance of these factors for individuals and the group as a whole. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were interviewed from two consultants' outpatient clinics. Forty-five were male and 37 female. Seventy-nine were white. The most important factors to patients with glaucoma were the risk of moderate visual impairment and the risk of blindness, with an importance of 38% and 27%, respectively. The use of topical medication had an importance of 11%. Proceeding to surgical intervention (trabeculectomy) had an importance of 15%, and the small risk of visual deterioration after surgery (trabeculectomy) had an importance of 9%. CONCLUSIONS: To patients, the most important factors regarding glaucoma and its treatment are the risks of moderate visual loss (the ability to continue to drive) and long-term blindness. The treatment methods used are of much less importance.

Adult↗

Identifying and establishing consensus on the most important safety features of GP computer systems: e-Delphi study.

Our objective was to identify and establish consensus on the most important safety features of GP computer systems, with a particular emphasis on medicines management. We used a two-round electronic Delphi survey, completed by a 21-member multidisciplinary expert panel, all from the UK. The main outcome measure was percentage agreement of the panel members on the importance of the presence of a number of different safety features (presented as clinical statements) on GP computer systems. We found 90% or greater agreement on the importance of 32 (58%) statements. These statements, indicating issues considered to be of considerable importance (rated as important or very important), related to: computerised alerts; the need to avoid spurious alerts; making it difficult to override critical alerts; having audit trails of such overrides; support for safe repeat prescribing; effective computer-user interface; importance of call and recall management; and the need to be able to run safety reports. The high level of agreement among the expert panel members indicates clear themes and priorities that need to be addressed in any further improvement of safety features in primary care computing systems.

Decision Support Systems, Clinical↗

Incidence and possible causes of prescribing potentially hazardous/contraindicated drug combinations in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Preventing the use of medications where there is the potential for serious drug-drug interactions or drug-disease interactions (contraindications) is essential to ensure patient safety. Previous studies have looked at the incidence of prescribing contraindicated drug combinations, but little is known about the underlying reasons for the co-prescribing events. The objectives of this study were to estimate the incidence of prescribing contraindicated drug combinations in general practice and to explore the clinical context, possible causes and potential systems failures leading to their occurrence. METHODS: A list of contraindicated drug combinations was compiled according to established references. A search of computerised patient medication records was performed, followed by detailed chart review and assessment. The patient records from four general practices in an area of England were searched for a period of 1 year (1 June 1999-31 May 2000) to identify contraindicated drug combinations. All patients registered with the four participating practices during the study period were included (estimated n = 37 940). Medical records of the cases identified by the computer search were reviewed in detail and relevant information was extracted. Each case was then independently assessed by a pharmacist and a physician who judged whether the co-prescribing was justified and whether it was associated with an adverse drug event. Proximal causes and potential systems failures were suggested for each co-prescribing event. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: Fourteen patients with potential drug-drug interactions and 50 patients with potential drug-disease interactions were identified. Overall, these represent an incidence of 1.9 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 1.5, 2.3) or 4.3 per 1000 patients being concurrently prescribed > or =2 drugs per year (95% CI 3.2, 5.4). 62 cases involving 63 co-prescribing events were reviewed. Two-thirds of these events involved medications that were initiated by hospital doctors. Awareness of the potential drug-drug or drug-disease interactions was documented in one-third of the events at the time of initial co-prescribing. Within the study period, the co-prescribing was judged to be not justified in 44 events (70%). Potential drug-drug interactions possibly resulted in two adverse drug events. The majority of contraindicated co-prescribing related to drug-disease interactions involved the use of propranolol or timolol eye drops for patients receiving bronchodilators and the use of amiodarone for patients receiving levothyroxine sodium. CONCLUSION: The prescribing of contraindicated drug combinations was relatively rare in this study. Multiple possible causes and systems failures were identified and could be used to develop strategies for the prevention of prescribing errors involving contraindicated drug combinations in primary care.

Contraindications↗

Improving the safety features of general practice computer systems.

General practice computer systems already have a number of important safety features. However, there are problems in that general practitioners (GPs) have come to rely on hazard alerts when they are not foolproof. Furthermore, GPs do not know how to make best use of safety features on their systems. There are a number of solutions that could help to improve the safety features of general practice computer systems and also help to improve the abilities of healthcare professionals to use these safety features.

Computer Literacy↗

Exploring factors associated with patients' satisfaction with medication change: a questionnaire survey.

The recent drive to encourage general practitioners (GPs) to rationalise their prescribing has implications for patients who may have their medication changed. A postal survey of such patients was conducted and it wasfound that 65% were at least reasonably satisfied with the way theyfound out about changes in their medication. Logistic analysis showed that patients were more satisfied when they had been told about the change by a GP or a pharmacist or by a letterfrom the practice.

Aged↗

Safer medicines management in primary care.

Errors in the medicines management process represent an important source of iatrogenic harm in primary care. Most errors result from underlying systems-based problems that are amenable to intervention and potentially preventable. In this paper, we seek to identify the frequency of medication-related morbidity in primary care, understand the underlying systemic reasons that increase risk of medication-related errors and iatrogenic harm, and suggest strategies for improving the safety of medicines management.

Drug Interactions↗

Comparison of five antimicrobial regimens for treatment of mild to moderate inflammatory facial acne vulgaris in the community: randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of five antimicrobial regimens for mild to moderate facial acne and whether propionibacterial antibiotic resistance affects treatment response. METHODS: In this randomised, observer-masked trial, 649 community participants were allocated one of five antibacterial regimens. Primary outcomes were patients' self-assessed improvement and reduction in inflamed lesions at 18 weeks. Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Moderate or greater improvement at 18 weeks was reported in 72 (55%) of 131 participants assigned oral oxytetracycline plus topical placebo, 70 (54%) of 130 assigned oral minocycline plus topical placebo, 78 (60%) of 130 assigned topical benzoyl peroxide plus oral placebo, 84 (66%) of 127 assigned topical erythromycin and benzoyl peroxide in a combined formulation plus oral placebo, and 82 (63%) of 131 assigned topical erythromycin and benzoyl peroxide separately plus oral placebo. Most improvement occurred in the first 6 weeks. Treatment differences for the proportion of people with at least moderate improvement were: minocycline versus oxytetracycline -1.2% (unadjusted 95% CI -13.3 to 10.9); combined erythromycin and benzoyl peroxide versus oxytetracycline 11.1% (-0.7 to 22.9) and versus minocycline 12.3% (0.4 to 24.2); erythromycin and benzoyl peroxide separately versus combined formulation -3.5% (-15.2 to 8.2); benzoyl peroxide versus oxytetracycline 5.0% (-7.0 to 17.0), versus minocycline 6.2% (-5.8 to 18.2), and versus combined formulation -6.1% (-17.9 to 5.7). Benzoyl peroxide was the most cost-effective treatment. Efficacy of both tetracyclines was reduced by pre-existing tetracycline resistance. INTERPRETATION: Topical benzoyl peroxide and benzoyl peroxide/erythromycin combinations are similar in efficacy to oral oxytetracycline and minocycline and are not affected by propionibacterial antibiotic resistance.

Acne Vulgaris↗