Wasylewicz, A. T., & Scheepers-Hoeks, A. M. J. W. (2019). Clinical decision support systems. Fundamentals of clinical data science, 153-169.
Wasylewicz and Scheepers-Hoeks (2019), in discussing clinical decision support systems (C.D.S.S.), refer to a broad spectrum of solutions consisting of computerized and non-computerized interventions. Manual tools containing clinical guidelines, in addition to digital resources, such as Clinical Key or UpToDate, are helping to address the issue of information overload. Being basic or advanced, C.D.S.S. can relate to directing attention, such as laboratory or pharmacy information systems or offering patient-specific recommendations like drug-disease interactions or dosing support during renal impairment. The authors state that with E.H.R.s and digitalization constantly producing more significant amounts of clinical data, having high-performing C.D.S.S. to help optimize patient care is imperative. This is especially important in practice, given the challenge providers face in accessing and using the information during their decision-making process.
Assessment
Both authors, A.T.M. Wasylewicz and A.M.J.W. Scheepers-Hoeks represent reputable hospitals in the Netherlands, like Catharina Hospital and Maastricht University Medical Center. Their knowledge of clinical pharmacy and toxicology adds to the discussion team on integrated clinical decision support systems (C.D.S.S.) and their impact on health care. In addition, the in-depth evaluation of C.D.S.S.’s usability, types, and challenges implies an immense field knowledge, adding more weight to the article.
Reflection
This article delivers a detailed insight into how C.D.S.S. are developing and the functions and challenges of these systems, similar to my project’s research on improving clinical decision-making. The significant role of high-quality C.D.S.S. in healthcare improvement is significantly related to my research. Also, looking at many C.D.S.S. models and their consequences leads to valuable ideas that can help the creation and use of sound decision-support systems in the world of health. This article is informative and explains the complicated nature and professional prospects of C.D.S.S. in medical practice.
Bright, T. J., Wong, A., Dhurjati, R., Bristow, E., Bastian, L., Coeytaux, R. R., … & Lobach, D. (2012). Effect of clinical decision-support systems: a systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine, 157(1), 29-43.
The comprehensive review published by Bright et al. (2012) describes the role of clinical decision-support systems (C.D.S.S.s) in various healthcare arenas, including clinical outcomes, health processes, workload, efficiency, patient satisfaction, cost, and provider use and implementation. They reviewed 148 previously published randomized, controlled trials that have been carried out in different health centres to determine the effectiveness of electronic C.D.S.S.s. The evidence indicates that both the vendor-driven and practice-developed C.D.S.S.s successfully promote process measures of the health care process, including the provision of preventive care services, performance of clinical diagnostic studies, and administration of appropriate therapies. On the other hand, the data about the functionality connected with the efficiency of the health care system and its financial aspects are still rather ordinary. The review summary demonstrates the capability of C.D.S.S.s in different settings and highlights the need for more studies in the areas that need to be covered further.
Assessment
The authors of the study, led by the Bright group, were published in the recognized Journal Annals of Internal Medicine, demonstrating high credibility. Besides, science-based data selection, extraction, and synthesis methods have recently provided them with credible results. Additionally, incorporating a large number of randomized, controlled trials helps bolster the validity of the paper results despite the mixed-method approach of the study and possible publication bias.
Reflection
The given article offers a great deal of contribution to C.D.S.S.’s improvement of healthcare processes. This could be of enormous benefit, especially when matched with the goals of my project. Pooling data on different types of outcomes, first and foremost, clinical and economic measures, assists me in seeing how C.D.S.S.s may affect clinical settings. Moreover, the lack of evidence in specific points will inform me on what topics require more in-depth research and help me spot the gaps in what is already known about the subject. Ultimately, the review provides a framework for ensuring adequate early-stage monitoring and gives future insights.
Muhiyaddin, R., Abd-Alrazaq, A. A., Househ, M., Alam, T., & Shah, Z. (2020). The impact of clinical decision support systems (C.D.S.S.) on physicians: a scoping review. The Importance of Health Informatics in Public Health during a Pandemic, 470-473.
A scoping review was done by Muhiyaddin et al. (2020), which looked into the effect of Clinical Decision Support Systems (C.D.S.S.s) on physicians. The researchers highlighted both the positive and negative potentials of C.D.S.S. adoption. Some positive outcomes included improving work rates, individualistic care provision, building up medical knowledge, high faith in decision-making, prescription drugs, and avoiding unnecessary lab and medical tests. Positive and negative informatics have been seen in many ways, such as negligent documentation, dial issues in physician-patient communication, and unnecessary referrals. The analysis produced 14 studies from screening 300 and utilized a narrative synthesis to bring together the results.
Assessment
The researchers Muhiyaddin, Abd-Alrazaq, Househ, Alam, and Shah have demonstrated their credible involvement in health informatics for research as they work in recognized institutions. Moreover, the scoping review method used widely searched databases, types of studies, and writing procedures to ensure the results’ accuracy. The systematic review involved studies from a wide range of electronic databases, and the independent selection process completed by two reviewers made the systematic review even more valid.
Reflection
The article aptly captures the complex role that C.D.S.S. implementation plays on physicians, which aligns with my research focus on technology adoption. The realization and acknowledgement of the role played by both the positive and negative impacts reinforce my comprehension of the complexities involved when it comes to C.D.S.S. use and show me where measures to reduce the negative aspects emanating from C.D.S.S. utilization and, at the same time, show me where to increase the beneficial elements can be made. In addition, the review approach used in this synthesis, featuring a narrative approach, allows for an in-depth commentary on the literature, enabling the interpretation of the results and identification of the unaddressed areas. Generically speaking, this scoping review is an essential tool in interpreting the multidimensional ramifications of physicians in clinical practice related to C.D.S.S.
References
Muhiyaddin, R., Abd-Alrazaq, A. A., Househ, M., Alam, T., & Shah, Z. (2020). The impact of clinical decision support systems (C.D.S.S.) on physicians: a scoping review. The Importance of Health Informatics in Public Health during a Pandemic, 470-473.
Bright, T. J., Wong, A., Dhurjati, R., Bristow, E., Bastian, L., Coeytaux, R. R., … & Lobach, D. (2012). Effect of clinical decision-support systems: a systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine, 157(1), 29-43.
Wasylewicz, A. T., & Scheepers-Hoeks, A. M. J. W. (2019). Clinical decision support systems. Fundamentals of clinical data science, 153-169.
write