No abstract

Aim: This review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of evidence for the use of clinical and quality dashboards in health care environments. Methods:A literature search was performed for the dates 1996 to 2012 on CINAHL, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, Science Direct and ACM Digital Library. A citation search and a hand search of relevant papers were also conducted.Results: One hundred and twenty two full text papers were retrieved of which 11 were included in the review. There was considerable heterogeneity in implementation setting, dashboard users and indicators used. There was evidence that in contexts where dashboards were easily accessible to clinicians (such as in the form of a screen saver) their use was associated with improved care processes and patient outcomes. Conclusion:There is some evidence that implementing clinical and/or quality dashboards that provide immediate access to information for clinicians can improve adherence to quality guidelines and may help improve patient outcomes. However, further high quality detailed research studies need to be conducted to obtain evidence of their efficacy and establish guidelines for their design.4

The literature suggests that smart pumps reduce but do not eliminate programming errors. Although the hard limits of a drug library play a main role in intercepting medication errors, soft limits were still not as effective as hard limits because of high override rates. Compliance in using smart pumps is key towards effectively preventing errors. Opportunities for improvement include upgrading drug libraries, developing standardized drug libraries, decreasing the number of unnecessary warnings, and developing stronger approaches to minimize workarounds. Also, as with other clinical information systems, smart pumps should be implemented with the idea of using continuous quality improvement processes to iteratively improve their use.

BACKGROUNDInjuries from falls are major contributors to complications and death in older adults. Despite evidence from efficacy trials that many falls can be prevented, rates of falls resulting in injury have not declined. METHODSWe conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a multifactorial intervention that included risk assessment and individualized plans, administered by specially trained nurses, to prevent fall injuries. A total of 86 primary care practices across 10 health care systems were randomly assigned to the intervention or to enhanced usual care (the control) (43 practices each). The participants were community-dwelling adults, 70 years of age or older, who were at increased risk for fall injuries. The primary outcome, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was the first serious fall injury, adjudicated with the use of participant report, electronic health records, and claims data. We hypothesized that the event rate would be lower by 20% in the intervention group than in the control group. RESULTSThe demographic and baseline characteristics of the participants were similar in the intervention group (2802 participants) and the control group (2649 participants); the mean age was 80 years, and 62.0% of the participants were women. The rate of a first adjudicated serious fall injury did not differ significantly between the groups, as assessed in a time-to-first-event analysis (events per 100 person-years of follow-up, 4.9 in the intervention group and 5.3 in the control group; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.06; P = 0.25). The rate of a first participant-reported fall injury was 25.6 events per 100 person-years of follow-up in the intervention group and 28.6 events per 100 person-years of follow-up in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.99; P = 0.004). The rates of hospitalization or death were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONSA multifactorial intervention, administered by nurses, did not result in a significantly lower rate of a first adjudicated serious fall injury than enhanced usual care.

No abstract