Why physicians do not prescribe a thiazide diuretic

Clinical Decision Support to Address Racial Disparities in Hypertension Control in an Integrated Delivery System: Evaluation of a Natural Experiment

INTRODUCTION

Effective, equity-promoting interventions implemented by health care systems are needed to address health care disparities and population-level health disparities. We evaluated the impact of a clinical decision support tool to improve evidence-based thiazide diuretic prescribing among Black patients to address racial disparities in hypertension control.

METHODS

We employed an interrupted time series design and qualitative interviews to evaluate the implementation of the tool. Our primary outcome measure was the monthly rate of thiazide use among eligible patients before and after implementation of the tool (January 2013-December 2016). We modeled month-to-month changes in thiazide use for Black and White patients, overall, and by sex and medical center racial composition. We conducted key informant interviews to identify modifiable facilitators and barriers to implementation of the tool across medical centers.

RESULTS

Of the 318,720 patients, 15.5% were Black. We observed no change in thiazide use or blood pressure control following the implementation of the tool in either racial subgroup. There was a slight but statistically significant reduction (2.32 percentage points, p < 0.01) in thiazide use among Black patients following the removal the tool that was not observed among White patients. Factors affecting the tool's implementation included physician and pharmacist resistance to thiazide use and a lack of ongoing promotion of the tool.

DISCUSSION

The clinical decision support tool was insufficient to change prescribing practices and improve blood pressure control among Black patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Future interventions should consider physician attitudes about thiazide prescribing and the importance of multilevel approaches to address hypertension disparities.

Factors associated with clinical inertia: an integrative review

Failure to initiate or intensify therapy according to evidence-based guidelines is increasingly being acknowledged as a phenomenon that contributes to inadequate management of chronic conditions, and is referred to as clinical inertia. However, the number and complexity of factors associated with the clinical reasoning that underlies the decision-making processes in medicine calls for a critical examination of the consistency of the concept. Indeed, in the absence of information on and justification of treatment decisions that were made, clinical inertia may be only apparent, and actually reflect good clinical practice. This integrative review seeks to address the factors generally associated with clinical inaction, in order to better delineate the concept of true clinical inertia.