rss
J Am Med Inform Assoc 19:86-93 doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000124
  • Research and applications

Guided medication dosing for elderly emergency patients using real-time, computerized decision support

  1. David W Bates3,4,5
  1. 1Division of Emergency Medicine, Washington University Institute for Public Health, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
  2. 2Department of Emergency Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
  3. 3Department of Medicine, Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  4. 4Department of Healthcare Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  5. 5Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Richard T Griffey, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, Campus Box 8072, 660 Euclid Ave., St. Louis, MO 63110-1010, USA; griffeyr{at}wustl.edu
  • Received 15 September 2010
  • Accepted 4 October 2011
  • Published Online First 3 November 2011

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the impact of a real-time computerized decision support tool in the emergency department that guides medication dosing for the elderly on physician ordering behavior and on adverse drug events (ADEs).

Design A prospective controlled trial was conducted over 26 weeks. The status of the decision support tool alternated OFF (7/17/06–8/29/06), ON (8/29/06–10/10/06), OFF (10/10/06–11/28/06), and ON (11/28/06–1/16/07) in consecutive blocks during the study period. In patients ≥65 who were ordered certain benzodiazepines, opiates, non-steroidals, or sedative-hypnotics, the computer application either adjusted the dosing or suggested a different medication. Physicians could accept or reject recommendations.

Measurements The primary outcome compared medication ordering consistent with recommendations during ON versus OFF periods. Secondary outcomes included the admission rate, emergency department length of stay for discharged patients, 10-fold dosing orders, use of a second drug to reverse the original medication, and rate of ADEs using previously validated explicit chart review.

Results 2398 orders were placed for 1407 patients over 1548 visits. The majority (49/53; 92.5%) of recommendations for alternate medications were declined. More orders were consistent with dosing recommendations during ON (403/1283; 31.4%) than OFF (256/1115; 23%) periods (p≤0.0001). 673 (43%) visits were reviewed for ADEs. The rate of ADEs was lower during ON (8/237; 3.4%) compared with OFF (31/436; 7.1%) periods (p=0.02). The remaining secondary outcomes showed no difference.

Limitations Single institution study, retrospective chart review for ADEs.

Conclusion Though overall agreement with recommendations was low, real-time computerized decision support resulted in greater acceptance of medication recommendations. Fewer ADEs were observed when computerized decision support was active.

Footnotes

  • Funding This study was supported by the Esther B. Kahn Foundation.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Ethics approval This study was approved by Partners Healthcare IRB.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Related Article

Access policy for JAMIA

All content published in JAMIA is deposited with PubMed Central by the publisher with a 12 month embargo. Authors/funders may pay an Unlocked fee of $2,000 to make the article free on the JAMIA website and PMC immediately on publication.

All content older than 12 months is freely available on this website.

AMIA members can log in with their JAMIA user name (email address) and password or via the AMIA website.