Among CVRM patients , the results tended towards a beneficial effect of CDSS , but only LDL-c target attainment in diabetes patients reached statistical significance .
Prompting , integration into the electronical health record , patient empowerment , and medication support were related to more effective CVRM .
Conclusion We did not find a clear clinical benefit from CDSS in cardiovascular risk factor levels and target attainment .
Some features of CDSS seem more promising than others .
Clinical relevance of CDSS in CVRM might additionally be sought in the improvement of shared decision making and patient empowerment
Background Cardiovascular risk management ( CVRM ) is notoriously difficult because of multi-morbidity and the different phenotypes and severities of cardiovascular disease .
Computerized decision support systems ( CDSS ) enable the clinician to integrate the latest scientific evidence and patient information into tailored strategies .
The effect on cardiovascular risk factor management is yet to be confirmed .
Shared electronic vascular risk decision support in primary care: Computerization of Medical Practices for the Enhancement of Therapeutic Effectiveness (COMPETE III) randomized trial.
BACKGROUND Computerized decision support systems ( CDSSs ) linked with electronic medical records ( EMRs ) are promoted as an effective means of improving patient care . However , very few high- quality studies are set in routine , community-based clinical care , and no consistent evidence of an effect on patient outcomes has been found . METHODS A r and omized controlled trial among EMR-using primary care practice s in Ontario , Canada . Patients 55 years or older with previous vascular events , diabetes mellitus , hypertension , or hypercholesterolemia were r and omized to the Computerization of Medical Practice s for the Enhancement of Therapeutic Effectiveness ( COMPETE III ) CDSS intervention or to usual care . The intervention included personally tailored electronic vascular risk monitoring and treatment advice shared between the physician and patient , risk calculation , and a clinical re source . The primary outcome was a composite score of 8 recommended process outcomes at 1 year . Data collectors were blinded to group allocation . Analysis used the intention-to-treat principle with multiple imputation for missing data . RESULTS We r and omized and included in the analysis 1102 patients in 49 community-based physician practice s ( 53.4 % female ; mean age , 69.1 years ; 28.0 % with a previous vascular event ) . The intervention group ( 545 [ 49.5 % ] ) had a significantly greater improvement in mean process composite , with a difference of 4.70 ( P < .001 ) on a 27-point scale . Intervention patients had significantly higher odds of rating their continuity of care ( 4.18 ; P < .001 ) and their ability to improve their vascular health ( 3.07 ; P < .001 ) as improved . Despite this improvement , the clinical outcomes -vascular events , clinical variables , and quality of life-were not improved . CONCLUSION Despite favorable review s and important improvements in the complex processes required to reduce vascular risk , clinical outcomes remain unchanged
Among CVRM patients , the results tended towards a beneficial effect of CDSS , but only LDL-c target attainment in diabetes patients reached statistical significance .
Prompting , integration into the electronical health record , patient empowerment , and medication support were related to more effective CVRM .
Conclusion We did not find a clear clinical benefit from CDSS in cardiovascular risk factor levels and target attainment .
Some features of CDSS seem more promising than others .
Clinical relevance of CDSS in CVRM might additionally be sought in the improvement of shared decision making and patient empowerment
Background Cardiovascular risk management ( CVRM ) is notoriously difficult because of multi-morbidity and the different phenotypes and severities of cardiovascular disease .
Computerized decision support systems ( CDSS ) enable the clinician to integrate the latest scientific evidence and patient information into tailored strategies .
The effect on cardiovascular risk factor management is yet to be confirmed .