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 .
Evaluation of computer based clinical decision support system and risk chart for management of hypertension in primary care: randomised controlled trial
Abstract Objectives : To investigate the effect of a computer based clinical decision support system and a risk chart on absolute cardiovascular risk , blood pressure , and prescribing of cardiovascular drugs in hypertensive patients . Design : Cluster r and omised controlled trial . Setting : 27 general practice s in Avon . Participants : 614 patients aged between 60 and 79 years with high blood pressure . Interventions : Patients were r and omised to computer based clinical decision support system plus cardiovascular risk chart ; cardiovascular risk chart alone ; or usual care . Main outcome measures : Percentage of patients in each group with a five year cardiovascular risk≥10 % , systolic blood pressure , diastolic blood pressure , prescribing of cardiovascular drugs . Results : Patients in the computer based clinical decision support system and chart only groups were no more likely to have cardiovascular risk reduced to below 10 % than patients receiving usual care . Patients in the computer based clinical decision support group were more likely to have a cardiovascular risk≥10 % than chart only patients , odds ratio 2.3 ( 95 % confidence interval 1.1 to 4.8 ) . The chart only group had significantly lower systolic blood pressure compared with the usual care group ( difference in means−4.6 mm Hg ( 95 % confidence interval−8.4 to−0.8 ) . Reduction of diastolic blood pressure did not differ between the three groups . The chart only group were twice as likely to be prescribed two classes of cardiovascular drugs and over three times as likely to be prescribed three or more classes of drugs compared with the other groups . Conclusions : The computer based clinical decision support system did not confer any benefit in absolute risk reduction or blood pressure control and requires further development and evaluation before use in clinical care can be recommended . Use of chart guidelines are associated with a potentially important reduction in systolic blood pressure
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 .