Impact of a Clinical Decision Support System on Inappropriate Prescription of Glucose-Lowering Agents for Patients With Renal Insufficiency in an Ambulatory Care Setting

A systematic review of the value of clinical decision support systems in the prescription of antidiabetic drugs

INTRODUCTION

The management of chronic diabetes mellitus and its complications demands customized glycaemia control strategies. Polypharmacy is prevalent among people with diabetes and comorbidities, which increases the risk of adverse drug reactions. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) may constitute an innovative solution to these problems. The aim of our study was to conduct a systematic review assessing the value of CDSSs for the management of antidiabetic drugs (AD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically searched the scientific literature published between January 2010 and October 2023. The retrieved studies were categorized as non-specific or AD-specific. The studies' quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The review's results were reported in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty studies met our inclusion criteria. The majority of AD-specific studies were conducted more recently (2020-2023) compared to non-specific studies (2010-2015). This trend hints at growing interest in more specialized CDSSs tailored for prescriptions of ADs. The nine AD-specific studies focused on metformin and insulin and demonstrated positive impacts of the CDSSs on different outcomes, including the reduction in the proportion of inappropriate prescriptions of ADs and in hypoglycaemia events. The 11 nonspecific studies showed similar trends for metformin and insulin prescriptions, although the CDSSs' impacts were not significant. There was a predominance of metformin and insulin in the studied CDSSs and a lack of studies on ADs such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists.

CONCLUSION

The limited number of studies, especially randomized clinical trials, interested in evaluating the application of CDSS in the management of ADs underscores the need for further investigations. Our findings suggest the potential benefit of applying CDSSs to the prescription of ADs particularly in primary care settings and when targeting clinical pharmacists. Finally, establishing core outcome sets is crucial for ensuring consistent and standardized evaluation of these CDSSs.

Discrepancies among equations to estimate the glomerular filtration rate for drug dosing decision making in aged patients: a cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

Patients often require adjustments to drug doses due to impaired renal function. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation using various equations can result in discrepancies, potentially leading to different dose adjustment recommendations.

AIM

To determine the clinical significance of discrepancies observed between different equations used to estimate GFR for drug dose adjustments in a real-world group of patients over 65 years in primary care.

METHOD

The Cockcroft-Gault (CG), Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD), Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), and Berlin Initiative Study 1 equations were applied to estimate GFR in a group of patients over 65 years old attending a primary care center. Results were compared using Bland-Altman plots, and limits of agreement (LoA) and overall bias were calculated. Regression analyses were conducted to identify the null difference GFR and the slope of differences for each pairwise comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 1886 patients were analyzed. Differences between patient-adjusted and body surface area (BSA)-normalized versions of the equations were not clinically relevant for dose adjustments, with LoAs below 20 mL/min. However, discrepancies among the original versions of several equations presented LoAs over 30 mL/min. Greater differences were found between CG and MDRD or CKD-EPI equations.

CONCLUSION

Clinically relevant differences in GFR estimation were observed among different equations, potentially impacting drug dose adjustments. However, discrepancies were not considered significant when comparing patient-adjusted and BSA-normalized versions of the equations, particularly for patients with BSA close to the average.

Monitoring for adverse drug events of high-risk medications with a computerized clinical decision support system: a prospective cohort study

Monitoring is recommended to prevent severe adverse drug events, but such examinations are often missed. To increase the number of monitoring that should be ordered for high-risk medications, we introduced a clinical decision support system (CDSS) that alerts and orders the monitoring for high-risk medications in an outpatient setting. We conducted a 2-year prospective cohort study at a tertiary care teaching hospital before (phase 1) and after (phase 2) the activation of a CDSS. The CDSS automatically provided alerts for liver function tests for vildagliptin, thyroid function tests for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and multikinase inhibitors (MKIs), and a slit-lamp examination of the eyes for oral amiodarone when outpatients were prescribed the medications but not examined for a fixed period. The order of laboratory tests automatically appeared if alert was accepted. The alerts were hidden and did not appear on the display before activation of the CDSS. The outcomes were the number of prescriptions with alerts and examinations. During the study period, 330 patients in phase 1 and 307 patients in phase 2 were prescribed vildagliptin, 20 patients in phase 1 and 19 patients in phase 2 were prescribed ICIs or MKIs, and 72 patients in phase 1 and 66 patients in phase 2 were prescribed oral amiodarone. The baseline characteristics were similar between the phases. In patients prescribed vildagliptin, the proportion of alerts decreased significantly (38% vs 27%, P < 0.0001), and the proportion of examinations increased significantly (0.9% vs 4.0%, P < 0.0001) after activation of the CDSS. In patients prescribed ICIs or MKIs, the proportion of alerts decreased significantly (43% vs 11%, P < 0.0001), and the proportion of examinations increased numerically, but not significantly (2.6% vs 7.0%, P = 0.13). In patients prescribed oral amiodarone, the proportion of alerts decreased (86% vs 81%, P = 0.055), and the proportion of examinations increased (2.2% and 3.0%, P = 0.47); neither was significant. The CDSS has potential to increase the monitoring for high-risk medications. Our study also highlighted the limited acceptance rate of monitoring by CDSS. Further studies are needed to explore the generalizability to other medications and the cause of the limited acceptance rates among physicians.