Information technology for doctors.

D Kalra

PubMed · 8907882

Information technology for doctors.

Abstract

Recent advances in information technology will offer clinicians valuable new tools to support the medical management of patients. The most important of these developments is the electronic health-care record itself, which will enable the quick and complete documentation of all clinical consultations, investigation and interventions, using voice or a pen to enter data onto intuitive graphical screen-interfaces. The next generation of systems will offer computerised decision support for a wide range of clinical management problems.

Explore related subjects

Decision Support Techniques Humans Medical Records Systems, Computerized Telemedicine Journal Article Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

D Kalra. Information technology for doctors.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8907882/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2001

Assessment of decision support for blood test ordering in primary care. a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Different methods for changing blood test-ordering behavior in primary care have been proven effective. However, randomized trials comparing these methods are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of two versions of BloodLink, a computer-based clinical decision support system, on blood test ordering among general practitioners. DESIGN: Randomized trial. SETTING: 44 practices of general practitioners in the region of Delft, the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 60 general practitioners in 44 practices who used computer-based patient records in their practices. INTERVENTION: After stratification by solo practices and group practices, practices were randomly assigned to use BloodLink-Restricted, which initially displays a reduced list of tests, or BloodLink-Guideline, which is based on the guidelines of the Dutch College of General Practitioners. MEASUREMENTS: Average number of blood tests ordered per order form per practice. RESULTS: General practitioners who used BloodLink-Guideline requested 20% fewer tests on average than did practitioners who used BloodLink-Restricted (mean [+/-SD], 5.5 +/- 0.9 tests vs. 6.9 +/- 1.6 tests, respectively; P = 0.003, Mann-Whitney test). CONCLUSIONS: Decision support based on guidelines is more effective in changing blood test-ordering behavior than is decision support based on initially displaying a limited number of tests. Guideline-driven decision support systems can be effective in reducing the number of laboratory tests ordered by primary care practitioners.

Decision Support Techniques↗

PubMed2001

Decision analysis.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Decision Support Techniques↗

PubMed2000

Users' guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.

Clinical experience provides clinicians with an intuitive sense of which findings on history, physical examination, and investigation are critical in making an accurate diagnosis, or an accurate assessment of a patient's fate. A clinical decision rule (CDR) is a clinical tool that quantifies the individual contributions that various components of the history, physical examination, and basic laboratory results make toward the diagnosis, prognosis, or likely response to treatment in a patient. Clinical decision rules attempt to formally test, simplify, and increase the accuracy of clinicians' diagnostic and prognostic assessments. Existing CDRs guide clinicians, establish pretest probability, provide screening tests for common problems, and estimate risk. Three steps are involved in the development and testing of a CDR: creation of the rule, testing or validating the rule, and assessing the impact of the rule on clinical behavior. Clinicians evaluating CDRs for possible clinical use should assess the following components: the method of derivation; the validation of the CDR to ensure that its repeated use leads to the same results; and its predictive power. We consider CDRs that have been validated in a new clinical setting to be level 1 CDRs and most appropriate for implementation. Level 1 CDRs have the potential to inform clinical judgment, to change clinical behavior, and to reduce unnecessary costs, while maintaining quality of care and patient satisfaction. JAMA. 2000;284:79-84

Decision Support Techniques↗