Physician’s expectations regarding prescribing clinical decision support systems in a Belgian hospital

Abstract

From the physicians' perspective drug-drug interaction checking, drug-allergy checking, and dosing guidance should receive the highest priority for development and implementation. Because the perceived usefulness has been identified as a decisive reason for using CDSSs, it seems feasible to take into account this prioritization when developing and implementing CDSSs. In order to overcome the physicians' perceived disadvantages, attention should go to the development of user-friendly systems that deliver clinical relevant alerts.

Pilot evaluation of an optimized context-specific drug–drug interaction alerting system: A controlled pre-post study

“…This home-grown system, called the "Clinical Workstation", evolved further and is fully integrated within the workflow of various medical services. This holistic approach provides an integrated view giving birth to various functionalities such as an integrated electronic medical record (EMR), computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and CDS for drug prescribing [14,18]. In Belgium, only physicians are allowed to prescribe drugs so physicians are the intended endusers for prescribing CDS.…”

“…The improvement strategies were chosen based on strategies proposed in the literature, experiences from previously conducted research in our hospital, a detailed analyses of alerts triggered in the old system, and discussions with the project team [14,17,18,[28][29][30][31].…”

“…Based on the results of previous studies and after discussions with the stakeholders in our hospital, we started with redesigning the CDS system for DDI screening two years ago [14,18]. In this study we report the results of the pilot launch of the new context-specific DDI system in two departments in the UZ Brussel hospital.…”

Quality in Australian after‐hours doctor home visits: exploring the clinical, professional and security supports available to involved practitioners

“…The third form of support, clinical support for AHHC doctors, can be in the form electronic clinical decision support systems (CDSSs), books, manuals, drug formularies and so on, which help clinicians with point‐of‐care decision making on issues like diagnosis, prioritizing investigations, recommending treatments and ordering medications . In Australian general practice, most clinical support tools are built‐in in softwares like the ‘Medical Director’ or ‘Best Practice’ and are easily available to regular‐hour office‐based GPs through their computers.…”

“…The third form of support, clinical support for AHHC doctors, can be in the form electronic clinical decision support systems (CDSSs), books, manuals, drug formularies and so on, which help clinicians with point-of-care decision making on issues like diagnosis, prioritizing investigations, recommending treatments and ordering medications. [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] In Australian general practice, most clinical support tools are built-in in softwares like the 'Medical Director' or 'Best Practice' and are easily available to regular-hour office-based GPs through their computers. They create opportunities for accessing and incorporating up-to-date, robust and evidence-based recommendations into everyday practice [18] and have been reported to be the most valued aspect of support for rural-based doctors.…”