TY - JOUR
T1 - The Effect of Laboratory Test-Based Clinical Decision Support Tools on Medication Errors and Adverse Drug Events
T2 - A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review
AU - Whitehead, Nedra S.
AU - Williams, Laurina
AU - Meleth, Sreelatha
AU - Kennedy, Sara
AU - Ubaka-Blackmoore, Nneka
AU - Kanter, Michael
AU - O'Leary, Kevin J.
AU - Classen, David
AU - Jackson, Brian
AU - Murphy, Daniel R.
AU - Nichols, James
AU - Stockwell, David
AU - Lorey, Thomas
AU - Epner, Paul
AU - Taylor, Jennifer
AU - Graber, Mark L.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors appreciate the thoughtful insights offered by the following expert panel members: Dr. David West, University of Colorado; Dr. Hardeep Singh, Houston Veteran’s Administration Patient Safety Center of Inquiry and Baylor College of Medicine; Dr. Ranjjt Singh, State University of New York at Buffalo, Department of Family Medicine; and Dr. Meera Viswanathan, RTI-EPC Evidence-Based Practice Center, RTI International.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.
PY - 2019/5/1
Y1 - 2019/5/1
N2 - Background: Laboratory and medication data in electronic health records create opportunities for clinical decision support (CDS) tools to improve medication dosing, laboratory monitoring, and detection of side effects. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of such tools in preventing medication-related harm. Methods: We followed the Laboratory Medicine Best Practice (LMBP) initiative's A-6 methodology. Searches of 6 bibliographic databases retrieved 8508 abstracts. Fifteen articles examined the effect of CDS tools on (a) appropriate dose or medication (n = 5), (b) laboratory monitoring (n = 4), (c) compliance with guidelines (n = 2), and (d) adverse drug events (n = 5). We conducted meta-analyses by using random-effects modeling. Results: We found moderate and consistent evidence that CDS tools applied at medication ordering or dispensing can increase prescriptions of appropriate medications or dosages [6 results, pooled risk ratio (RR), 1.48; 95% CI, 1.27-1.74]. CDS tools also improve receipt of recommended laboratory monitoring and appropriate treatment in response to abnormal test results (6 results, pooled RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.05-1.87). The evidence that CDS tools reduced adverse drug events was inconsistent (5 results, pooled RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.03). Conclusions: The findings support the practice of healthcare systems with the technological capability incorporating test-based CDS tools into their computerized physician ordering systems to (a) identify and flag prescription orders of inappropriate dose or medications at the time of ordering or dispensing and (b) alert providers to missing laboratory tests for medication monitoring or results that warrant a change in treatment. More research is needed to determine the ability of these tools to prevent adverse drug events.
AB - Background: Laboratory and medication data in electronic health records create opportunities for clinical decision support (CDS) tools to improve medication dosing, laboratory monitoring, and detection of side effects. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of such tools in preventing medication-related harm. Methods: We followed the Laboratory Medicine Best Practice (LMBP) initiative's A-6 methodology. Searches of 6 bibliographic databases retrieved 8508 abstracts. Fifteen articles examined the effect of CDS tools on (a) appropriate dose or medication (n = 5), (b) laboratory monitoring (n = 4), (c) compliance with guidelines (n = 2), and (d) adverse drug events (n = 5). We conducted meta-analyses by using random-effects modeling. Results: We found moderate and consistent evidence that CDS tools applied at medication ordering or dispensing can increase prescriptions of appropriate medications or dosages [6 results, pooled risk ratio (RR), 1.48; 95% CI, 1.27-1.74]. CDS tools also improve receipt of recommended laboratory monitoring and appropriate treatment in response to abnormal test results (6 results, pooled RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.05-1.87). The evidence that CDS tools reduced adverse drug events was inconsistent (5 results, pooled RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.03). Conclusions: The findings support the practice of healthcare systems with the technological capability incorporating test-based CDS tools into their computerized physician ordering systems to (a) identify and flag prescription orders of inappropriate dose or medications at the time of ordering or dispensing and (b) alert providers to missing laboratory tests for medication monitoring or results that warrant a change in treatment. More research is needed to determine the ability of these tools to prevent adverse drug events.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090821201&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85090821201&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1373/jalm.2018.028019
DO - 10.1373/jalm.2018.028019
M3 - Review article
C2 - 31639695
AN - SCOPUS:85090821201
SN - 2576-9456
VL - 3
SP - 1035
EP - 1048
JO - The journal of applied laboratory medicine
JF - The journal of applied laboratory medicine
IS - 6
ER -