Reviewing the impact of computerized provider order entry on clinical outcomes: The quality of systematic reviews

Short- and long-term effects of an electronic medication management system on paediatric prescribing errors

Electronic medication management (eMM) systems are designed to improve safety, but there is little evidence of their effectiveness in paediatrics. This study assesses the short-term (first 70 days of eMM use) and long-term (one-year) effectiveness of an eMM system to reduce prescribing errors, and their potential and actual harm. We use a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial (SWCRCT) at a paediatric referral hospital, with eight clusters randomised for eMM implementation. We assess long-term effects from an additional random sample of medication orders one-year post-eMM. In the SWCRCT, errors that are potential adverse drug events (ADEs) are assessed for actual harm. The study comprises 35,260 medication orders for 4821 patients. Results show no significant change in overall prescribing error rates in the first 70 days of eMM use (incident rate ratio [IRR] 1.05 [95%CI 0.92-1.21], but a 62% increase (IRR 1.62 [95%CI 1.28-2.04]) in potential ADEs suggesting immediate risks to safety. One-year post-eMM, errors decline by 36% (IRR 0.64 [95%CI 0.56-0.72]) and high-risk medication errors decrease by 33% (IRR 0.67 [95%CI 0.51-0.88]) compared to pre-eMM. In all periods, dose error rates are more than double that of other error types. Few errors are associated with actual harm, but 71% [95%CI 50-86%] of patients with harm experienced a dose error. In the short-term, eMM implementation shows no improvement in error rates, and an increase in some errors. A year after eMM error rates significantly decline suggesting long-term benefits. eMM optimisation should focus on reducing dose errors due to their high frequency and capacity to cause harm.

How effective are electronic medication systems in reducing medication error rates and associated harm among hospital inpatients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess: 1) changes in medication error rates and associated patient harm following electronic medication system (EMS) implementation; and 2) evidence of system-related medication errors facilitated by the use of an EMS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched Medline, Scopus, Embase, and CINAHL for studies published between January 2005 and March 2019, comparing medication errors rates with or without assessments of related harm (actual or potential) before and after EMS implementation. EMS was defined as a computer-based system enabling the prescribing, supply, and/or administration of medicines. Study quality was assessed.

RESULTS

There was substantial heterogeneity in outcomes of the 18 included studies. Only 2 were strong quality. Meta-analysis of 5 studies reporting change in actual harm post-EMS showed no reduced risk (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.18-8.38, P = .8) and meta-analysis of 3 studies reporting change in administration errors found a significant reduction in error rates (RR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.72-0.83, P = .004). Of 10 studies of prescribing error rates, 9 reported a reduction but variable denominators precluded meta-analysis. Twelve studies provided specific examples of system-related medication errors; 5 quantified their occurrence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Despite the wide-scale adoption of EMS in hospitals around the world, the quality of evidence about their effectiveness in medication error and associated harm reduction is variable. Some confidence can be placed in the ability of systems to reduce prescribing error rates. However, much is still unknown about mechanisms which may be most effective in improving medication safety and design features which facilitate new error risks.

Routine Health Information Systems in the European Context: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

(1) Background: The aim of this study is to provide a better understanding of the requirements to improve routine health information systems (RHISs) for the management of health systems, including the identification of best practices, opportunities, and challenges in the 53 countries and territories of the WHO European region. (2) Methods: We conducted an overview of systematics reviews and searched the literature in the databases MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Web of Science electronic databases. After a meticulous screening, we identified 20 that met the inclusion criteria, and RHIS evaluation results were presented according to the Performance of Routine Information System Management (PRISM) framework. (3) Results: The reviews were published between 2007 and 2020, focusing on the use of different systems or technologies and aimed to analyze interventions on professionals, centers, or patients' outcomes. All reviews examined showed variability in results in accordance with the variability of interventions and target populations. We have found different areas for improvement for RHISs according to the three determinants of the PRISM framework that influence the configuration of RHISs: technical, organizational, or behavioral elements. (4) Conclusions: RHIS interventions in the European region are promising. However, new global and international strategies and the development of tools and mechanisms should be promoted to highly integrate platforms among European countries.

Systematic review of computerized prescriber order entry and clinical decision support

PURPOSE

Results of a systematic review of published data on the effect of computerized prescriber order entry (CPOE) with clinical decision support on medication error (ME) and adverse drug event (ADE) rates are presented.

METHODS

Literature searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and other databases were conducted to identify English- and Spanish-language articles on selected CPOE outcomes published from 1995 through 2016; in addition, 5 specific journals were searched for pertinent articles published during the period 2010-16. Publications on controlled prospective studies and before-and-after studies that assessed MEs and/or ADEs as main outcomes were selected for inclusion in the review.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Data on MEs and ADEs could not be pooled, mainly due to heterogeneity in outcome definitions and study methodologies. The reviewed evidence indicated that CPOE implementation led to an overall reduction in errors at the prescription stage of the medication-use process (relative risk reduction, 0.29 [95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.85]; I ² = 99%) and reductions in most types of prescription errors, but CPOE also resulted in the emergence of other types of errors.

CONCLUSION

CPOE reduces the overall ME rate in the prescription process, as well as specific types of errors, such as wrong dose or strength, wrong drug, frequency, administration route, and drug-drug interaction errors. The implementation of CPOE can lead to new errors, such as wrong drug selection from drop-down menus.

Does the medical literature remain inadequately described despite having reporting guidelines for 21 years? - A systematic review of reviews: an update

PURPOSE

Reporting guidelines (eg, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials [CONSORT] statement) are intended to improve reporting standards and enhance the transparency and reproducibility of research findings. Despite accessibility of such guidelines, researchers are not required to adhere to them. Our goal was to determine the current status of reporting quality in the medical literature and examine whether adherence of reporting guidelines has improved since the inception of reporting guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight reporting guidelines, such as CONSORT, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis (QUOROM), STAndards for Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy (STARD), Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE), Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS), and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) were examined. Our inclusion criteria included reviews published between January 1996 to September 2016 which investigated the adherence to reporting guidelines in the literature that addressed clinical trials, systematic reviews, observational studies, meta-analysis, diagnostic accuracy, economic evaluations, and preclinical animal studies that were in English. All reviews were found on Web of Science, Excerpta Medical Database (EMBASE), MEDLINE, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL).

RESULTS

Among the general searching of 26,819 studies by using the designed searching method, 124 studies were included post screening. We found that 87.9% of the included studies reported suboptimal adherence to reporting guidelines. Factors associated with poor adherence included non-pharmacological interventions, year of publication, and trials concluding with significant results. Improved adherence was associated with better study designs such as allocation concealment, random sequence, large sample sizes, adequately powered studies, multiple authorships, and being published in journals endorsing guidelines.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the level of adherence to reporting guidelines remains suboptimal. Endorsement of reporting guidelines by journals is important and recommended.

Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

The PRISMA Statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve transparency of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses. Seven extensions to the PRISMA Statement have been published to address the reporting of different types or aspects of SRs, and another eight are in development. We performed a scoping review to map the research that has been conducted to evaluate the uptake and impact of the PRISMA Statement and extensions. We also synthesised studies evaluating how well SRs published after the PRISMA Statement was disseminated adhere to its recommendations.

METHODS

We searched for meta-research studies indexed in MEDLINE® from inception to 31 July 2017, which investigated some component of the PRISMA Statement or extensions (e.g. SR adherence to PRISMA, journal endorsement of PRISMA). One author screened all records and classified the types of evidence available in the studies. We pooled data on SR adherence to individual PRISMA items across all SRs in the included studies and across SRs published after 2009 (the year PRISMA was disseminated).

RESULTS

We included 100 meta-research studies. The most common type of evidence available was data on SR adherence to the PRISMA Statement, which has been evaluated in 57 studies that have assessed 6487 SRs. The pooled results of these studies suggest that reporting of many items in the PRISMA Statement is suboptimal, even in the 2382 SRs published after 2009 (where nine items were adhered to by fewer than 67% of SRs). Few meta-research studies have evaluated the adherence of SRs to the PRISMA extensions or strategies to increase adherence to the PRISMA Statement and extensions.

CONCLUSIONS

Many studies have evaluated how well SRs adhere to the PRISMA Statement, and the pooled result of these suggest that reporting of many items is suboptimal. An update of the PRISMA Statement, along with a toolkit of strategies to help journals endorse and implement the updated guideline, may improve the transparency of SRs.

Identifying approaches for assessing methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews: a descriptive study

BACKGROUND

The methodological quality and completeness of reporting of the systematic reviews (SRs) is fundamental to optimal implementation of evidence-based health care and the reduction of research waste. Methods exist to appraise SRs yet little is known about how they are used in SRs or where there are potential gaps in research best-practice guidance materials. The aims of this study are to identify reports assessing the methodological quality (MQ) and/or reporting quality (RQ) of a cohort of SRs and to assess their number, general characteristics, and approaches to 'quality' assessment over time.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE®, and EMBASE® were searched from January 1990 to October 16, 2014, for reports assessing MQ and/or RQ of SRs. Title, abstract, and full-text screening of all reports were conducted independently by two reviewers. Reports assessing the MQ and/or RQ of a cohort of ten or more SRs of interventions were included. All results are reported as frequencies and percentages of reports.

RESULTS

Of 20,765 unique records retrieved, 1189 of them were reviewed for full-text review, of which 76 reports were included. Eight previously published approaches to assessing MQ or reporting guidelines used as proxy to assess RQ were used in 80% (61/76) of identified reports. These included two reporting guidelines (PRISMA and QUOROM) and five quality assessment tools (AMSTAR, R-AMSTAR, OQAQ, Mulrow, Sacks) and GRADE criteria. The remaining 24% (18/76) of reports developed their own criteria. PRISMA, OQAQ, and AMSTAR were the most commonly used published tools to assess MQ or RQ. In conjunction with other approaches, published tools were used in 29% (22/76) of reports, with 36% (8/22) assessing adherence to both PRISMA and AMSTAR criteria and 26% (6/22) using QUOROM and OQAQ.

CONCLUSIONS

The methods used to assess quality of SRs are diverse, and none has become universally accepted. The most commonly used quality assessment tools are AMSTAR, OQAQ, and PRISMA. As new tools and guidelines are developed to improve both the MQ and RQ of SRs, authors of methodological studies are encouraged to put thoughtful consideration into the use of appropriate tools to assess quality and reporting.

International health IT benchmarking: learning from cross-country comparisons

OBJECTIVE

To pilot benchmark measures of health information and communication technology (ICT) availability and use to facilitate cross-country learning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prior Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development-led effort involving 30 countries selected and defined functionality-based measures for availability and use of electronic health records, health information exchange, personal health records, and telehealth. In this pilot, an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Working Group compiled results for 38 countries for a subset of measures with broad coverage using new and/or adapted country-specific or multinational surveys and other sources from 2012 to 2015. We also synthesized country learnings to inform future benchmarking.

RESULTS

While electronic records are widely used to store and manage patient information at the point of care-all but 2 pilot countries reported use by at least half of primary care physicians; many had rates above 75%-patient information exchange across organizations/settings is less common. Large variations in the availability and use of telehealth and personal health records also exist.

DISCUSSION

Pilot participation demonstrated interest in cross-national benchmarking. Using the most comparable measures available to date, it showed substantial diversity in health ICT availability and use in all domains. The project also identified methodological considerations (e.g., structural and health systems issues that can affect measurement) important for future comparisons.

CONCLUSION

While health policies and priorities differ, many nations aim to increase access, quality, and/or efficiency of care through effective ICT use. By identifying variations and describing key contextual factors, benchmarking offers the potential to facilitate cross-national learning and accelerate the progress of individual countries.

A New Computer-Based Tool to Reduce Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions in Hospitalized Geriatric Patients

BACKGROUND

Potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs), associated with adverse drug reactions, hospitalization, and wasteful healthcare spending, are common in elderly patients with comorbidities and multiple drugs.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to develop and validate a new tool to reduce PIPs in a hospitalized geriatric population.

METHODS

This was an observational cohort study of two cohorts (development [n = 100 subjects] and validation [n = 449 subjects]) of consecutive patients aged ≥65 years admitted to geriatric wards from April to December 2012. In the development phase, data on clinical and demographic characteristics, Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI), and prescribed drugs before hospital admission were collected and processed using a tool that integrates the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria and the Micromedex™ Drug-Reax System, a drug-management platform. This tool generated a report that was provided to the treating physicians. The weight of the PIPs, as defined by the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI), was assessed on admission and on discharge. Similar procedures were followed in the validation cohort.

RESULTS

PIPs were independently associated with polypharmacy and with prescribing of antithrombotics, sedatives and antidepressants in both cohorts. The use of the tool led to a significant reduction of the MAI score, both in the development (median score 4 [interquartile range; IQR 1-5] vs. 2 [IQR 0-4], p < 0.001) and in the validation cohorts (median 3 [IQR 1-5] vs. 2 [IQR 0-4], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This tool significantly reduced PIPs, as defined by the MAI score, in a hospitalized geriatric population. This strategy might be useful to minimize inappropriate medication exposure in this group.

Interventions for Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Are Practice Guidelines Based on Systematic Reviews?

PURPOSE

Are existing systematic reviews of interventions for age-related macular degeneration incorporated into clinical practice guidelines?

DESIGN

High-quality systematic reviews should be used to underpin evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and clinical care. We examined the reliability of systematic reviews of interventions for age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and described the main findings of reliable reviews in relation to clinical practice guidelines.

METHODS

Eligible publications were systematic reviews of the effectiveness of treatment interventions for AMD. We searched a database of systematic reviews in eyes and vision without language or date restrictions; the database was up to date as of May 6, 2014. Two authors independently screened records for eligibility and abstracted and assessed the characteristics and methods of each review. We classified reviews as reliable when they reported eligibility criteria, comprehensive searches, methodologic quality of included studies, appropriate statistical methods for meta-analysis, and conclusions based on results. We mapped treatment recommendations from the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Preferred Practice Patterns (PPPs) for AMD to systematic reviews and citations of reliable systematic reviews to support each treatment recommendation.

RESULTS

Of 1570 systematic reviews in our database, 47 met inclusion criteria; most targeted neovascular AMD and investigated anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) interventions, dietary supplements, or photodynamic therapy. We classified 33 (70%) reviews as reliable. The quality of reporting varied, with criteria for reliable reporting met more often by Cochrane reviews and reviews whose authors disclosed conflicts of interest. Anti-VEGF agents and photodynamic therapy were the only interventions identified as effective by reliable reviews. Of 35 treatment recommendations extracted from the PPPs, 15 could have been supported with reliable systematic reviews; however, only 1 recommendation cited a reliable intervention systematic review. No reliable systematic review was identified for 20 treatment recommendations, highlighting areas of evidence gaps.

CONCLUSIONS

For AMD, reliable systematic reviews exist for many treatment recommendations in the AAO PPPs and should be cited to support these recommendations. We also identified areas where no high-level evidence exists. Mapping clinical practice guidelines to existing systematic reviews is one way to highlight areas where evidence generation or evidence synthesis is either available or needed.

Dermatopathologists' concerns and challenges with clinical information in the skin biopsy requisition form: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Communication failures between clinicians and dermatopathologists are prevalent. Our primary objective was to characterize the concerns and challenges of dermatopathologists posed by incomplete or inaccurate clinical information in the skin biopsy requisition form.

METHODS

An explanatory sequential, mixed-methods study design comprised of a survey sent to 1103 members of the American Society of Dermatopathology (ASDP), followed by two focus group sessions.

RESULTS

A total of 54% (598/1103) of dermatopathologists completed the questionnaire. Most dermatopathologists (80%; 436/548) viewed their roles to be providers of histopathological diagnosis and a report that is clinically meaningful. Paper or electronic requisition forms were the most common communication method (85%; 458/541) and were associated with the highest rates of dissatisfaction in 36% (193/537) of respondents. Inadequacy of specimens emerged as an important factor influencing judgment of the quality of provided clinical information. 44.7% (261/584) of dermatopathologists spent 30 minutes or more on average every day searching for relevant clinical information to assist with their histopathologic interpretation.

CONCLUSION

ASDP dermatopathologists expressed significant dissatisfaction with the quality of clinical information in the requisition form and the time spent gathering information necessary for accurate, timely and clinically meaningful diagnosis. These findings have implications for the quality, safety and efficiency of dermatologic care.

Improving red blood cell orders, utilization, and management with point-of-care clinical decision support

BACKGROUND

The computerized order for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion within our electronic health record was redesigned with integrated clinical decision support (CDS) to reinforce our restrictive transfusion policy. These changes encouraged 1-unit (1U) RBC orders, clarified hemoglobin (Hb) transfusion triggers, and discouraged unnecessary orders. This study assessed whether these changes resulted in durable effects on provider practices.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The study compared three 1-year subperiods from August 2011 to August 2014, with each year corresponding to a historical control period, preintervention and postintervention years. This study analyzed ratios of 1U versus 2-unit (2U) orders and the absolute rate of RBC orders, units charged, Hb transfusion triggers, repeat transfusion orders, and selected clinical indications both institution-wide and across several subpopulations.

RESULTS

Our institution-wide ratio of 1U versus 2U orders increased from 0.50 to 1.20 (p < 0.0001) in the pre- to postintervention subperiods, respectively. The number of units charged per day decreased from 15.68 to 13.53 (p < 0.001), while rates of initial and repeat orders remained stable. Proportion of clinical indications used and mean Hb triggers demonstrated generally positive results. The changes observed between the pre- and postintervention years were far greater than changes between historical control versus preintervention years, reinforcing attribution of results to computerized physician order entry changes.

CONCLUSION

Use of computerized orders and CDS encouraged a restrictive transfusion policy, which was highly successful in changing provider practices. We also succeeded in decreasing mean Hb triggers and overall utilization of RBCs. These findings persisted across many subpopulations.

Cost-effectiveness of an electronic medication ordering system (CPOE/CDSS) in hospitalized patients

INTRODUCTION

Prescribing medication is an important aspect of almost all in-hospital treatment regimes. Besides their obviously beneficial effects, medicines can also cause adverse drug events (ADE), which increase morbidity, mortality and health care costs. Partially, these ADEs arise from medication errors, e.g. at the prescribing stage. ADEs caused by medication errors are preventable ADEs. Until now, medication ordering was primarily a paper-based process and consequently, it was error prone. Computerized Physician Order Entry, combined with basic Clinical Decision Support System (CPOE/CDSS) is considered to enhance patient safety. Limited information is available on the balance between the health gains and the costs that need to be invested in order to achieve these positive effects. Aim of this study was to study the balance between the effects and costs of CPOE/CDSS compared to the traditional paper-based medication ordering.

METHODS

The economic evaluation was performed alongside a clinical study (interrupted time series design) on the effectiveness of CPOE/CDSS, including a cost minimization and a cost-effectiveness analysis. Data collection took place between 2005 and 2008. Analyses were performed from a hospital perspective. The study was performed in a general teaching hospital and a University Medical Centre on general internal medicine, gastroenterology and geriatric wards. Computerized Physician Order Entry, combined with basic Clinical Decision Support System (CPOE/CDSS) was compared to a traditional paper based system. All costs of both medication ordering systems are based on resources used and time invested. Prices were expressed in Euros (price level 2009). Effectiveness outcomes were medication errors and preventable adverse drug events.

RESULTS

During the paper-based prescribing period 592 patients were included, and during the CPOE/CDSS period 603. Total costs of the paper-based system and CPOE/CDSS amounted to €12.37 and €14.91 per patient/day respectively. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) for medication errors was 3.54 and for preventable adverse drug events 322.70, indicating the extra amount (€) that has to be invested in order to prevent one medication error or one pADE.

CONCLUSIONS

CPOE with basic CDSS contributes to a decreased risk of preventable harm. Overall, the extra costs of CPOE/CDSS needed to prevent one ME or one pADE seem to be acceptable.

The fungibility of time in claims of efficiency: the case of making transmission of prescriptions electronic in English general practice

OBJECTIVES

This paper presents a study of the effects of the implementation of the NHS Electronic Prescription Service (EPS) on time spent on repeat prescribing in English general practice. EPS is a new network service for the electronic transmission of primary care prescriptions, principally between GP practices and community pharmacies. This service is promoted on the basis of the importance of safe and timely supply of medicines, and the level of medicines use by many patients with treatable chronic conditions. The service is also based on presumptions of significant time-savings and efficiency gains for general practices and GPs. Our objective was to assess the time-related changes (including time savings) conditioned by digital transmission of prescriptions, specifically for repeat prescribing activity in primary care practices.

METHODS

As part of the official evaluation of EPS in the English NHS we undertook a qualitative research design with field studies in four of the first GP practices adopting EPS. This research was based on interviews with clinical and administrative staff, and non-participant observation of repeat prescribing related activities.

RESULTS

We found that the use of EPS reduced turnaround time and conditioned changes in the workflow, with time-savings found mainly in relation to administrative tasks. But the use of this technology also created additional tasks and shifted existing tasks and responsibilities. Thus elimination of tasks did not automatically correspond to potential staff savings or cost savings. Tasks that were eliminated and new tasks that were created were not equivalent in terms of time spent, quality of attention required, and roles involved.

CONCLUSIONS

The wider claim that healthcare information technology saves time and increases efficiency is often based on assumptions of the fungibility of time and people - i.e. that units of time added or saved on different steps of the workflow can be summed up as if they were all of the same kind, and thus reveal any net efficiency gain. But workflow time savings involve changes in the quality of tasks, redistribution of work and responsibility that mean that time can hardly be added or subtracted to obtain 'efficiency totals'.

Role of computerized physician order entry usability in the reduction of prescribing errors

OBJECTIVES

Some hospitals have implemented computerized physician order entry (CPOE) systems to reduce the medical error rates. However, research in this area has been very limited, especially regarding the impact of CPOE use on the reduction of prescribing errors. Moreover, the past studies have dealt with the overall impact of CPOE on the reduction of broadly termed "medical errors", and they have not specified which medical errors have been reduced by CPOE. Furthermore, the majority of the past research in this field has been either qualitative or has not used robust empirical techniques. This research examined the impacts of usability of CPOE systems on the reduction of doctors' prescribing errors.

METHODS

One hundred and sixty-six questionnaires were used for quantitative data analyses. Since the data was not normally distributed, partial least square path modelling-as the second generation of multivariate data analyses-was applied to analyze data.

RESULTS

It was found that the ease of use of the system and information quality can significantly reduce prescribing errors. Moreover, the user interface consistency and system error prevention have a significant positive impact on the perceived ease of use. More than 50% of the respondents believed that CPOE reduces the likelihood of drug allergy, drug interaction, and drug dosing errors thus improving patient safety.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribing errors in terms of drug allergy, drug interaction, and drug dosing errors are reduced if the CPOE is not error-prone and easy to use, if the user interface is consistent, and if it provides quality information to doctors.

Efficacy of psychological treatment for headaches: an overview of systematic reviews and analysis of potential modifiers of treatment efficacy

OBJECTIVES

A variety of psychological treatments exist for headaches (HAs). Their efficacy has been evaluated through systematic reviews with meta-analysis. Our goal was to evaluate the scope of these reviews and reevaluate the efficacy of treatments considering potential sources of variation systematically. These findings should help guide clinical practice and will provide guidance to researchers planning to address the efficacy of psychological treatments for HAs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two systematic reviews were conducted: one searched for systematic reviews with meta-analysis exploring the efficacy of psychological treatments for HA in Cochrane Database, DARE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, Medline, and PsychINFO from inception to December 2011. Two independent reviewers screened, evaluated quality, and extracted data. The second review searched for primary studies from the included reviews estimating the efficacy of psychological treatments for a clinically significant change.

RESULTS

Eighteen reviews met a priori criteria for inclusion. The broad scope of research on efficacy of psychological treatments for HA is reflected by variation in clinical and methodological characteristics of the reviews. These variations were explored through meta-analysis and subgroup analysis of 41 primary studies and showed that some of these variations, including time of assessment, treatment type, age, HA diagnosis, and study quality, can impact the magnitude of treatment effect.

DISCUSSION

There is substantial evidence in favor of psychological treatments for HA management. Further investigation, especially in specific treatments (cognitive-behavioral or autogenic treatment) for HA disorders, is needed. The assessment of these systematic reviews highlighted key areas where improvement should be made to increase the quality of evidence.

A systematic scoping review of adherence to reporting guidelines in health care literature

Background

Reporting guidelines have been available for the past 17 years since the inception of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement in 1996. These guidelines were developed to improve the quality of reporting of studies in medical literature. Despite the widespread availability of these guidelines, the quality of reporting of medical literature remained suboptimal. In this study, we assess the current adherence practice to reporting guidelines; determine key factors associated with better adherence to these guidelines; and provide recommendations to enhance adherence to reporting guidelines for future studies.

Methods

We undertook a systematic scoping review of systematic reviews of adherence to reporting guidelines across different clinical areas and study designs. We searched four electronic databases (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, Embase, and Medline) from January 1996 to September 2012. Studies were included if they addressed adherence to one of the following guidelines: Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis (QUOROM), Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs (TREND), Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) and Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). A protocol for this study was devised. A literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by two authors in duplicate. This study reporting follows the PRISMA guidelines.

Results

Our search retrieved 5159 titles, of which 50 were eligible. Overall, 86.0% of studies reported suboptimal levels of adherence to reporting guidelines. Factors associated with better adherence included journal impact factor and endorsement of guidelines, publication date, funding source, multisite studies, pharmacological interventions and larger studies.

Conclusion

Reporting guidelines in the clinical literature are important to improve the standards of reporting of clinical studies; however, adherence to these guidelines remains suboptimal. Action is therefore needed to enhance the adherence to these standards. Strategies to enhance adherence include journal editorial policies endorsing these guidelines.

Assessment of efficiency and safety of the comprehensive Chemotherapy Assistance Program for ordering oncology medications

PURPOSE

To assess whether the newly developed Comprehensive Chemotherapy Assistance Program (CAP) decreases errors and increases performance efficiency in ordering oncology medications as compared to the existing Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) system, the Order Communication System (OCS).

METHODS

All chemotherapy prescriptions ordered using OCS and CAP systems during the first year of CAP implementation were prospectively analyzed to identify near-miss cases. The efficiency outcomes were determined in a trial setting with eight predefined hypothetical chemotherapy regimens, each with four measures of the average time, movement distance on the screen, maximum input interval time, and number of mouse or keystrokes per order. A total of 14 physicians participated in the study, and each regimen was ordered twice, once using CAP and once using OCS.

RESULTS

For all near-miss types, CAP orders showed significant improvements as compared with OCS orders (p<0.0001). For CAP orders, incorrect dose and agent errors were reduced by 43.9% and 31.6%, respectively. Compared with OCS orders, regimen defects, drug omissions, and incorrect data input errors were reduced by more than 70% for CAP orders. For all four efficiency measures, a statistically significant competence was identified when physicians ordered a chemotherapy prescription with CAP as compared with OCS (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate the superiority of CAP over the existing CPOE system for ordering oncology medications with regard to safety and efficiency.