Physician Compliance With a Computerized Clinical Decision Support System for Anemia Management of Patients With End-stage Kidney Disease on Hemodialysis: Retrospective Electronic Health Record Observational Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Previous studies on clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) for the management of renal anemia in patients with end-stage kidney disease undergoing hemodialysis have previously focused solely on the effects of the CDSS. However, the role of physician compliance in the efficacy of the CDSS remains ill-defined. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate whether physician compliance was an intermediate variable between the CDSS and the management outcomes of renal anemia. METHODS: We extracted the electronic health records of patients with end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis at the Far Eastern Memorial Hospital Hemodialysis Center (FEMHHC) from 2016 to 2020. FEMHHC implemented a rule-based CDSS for the management of renal anemia in 2019. We compared the clinical outcomes of renal anemia between the pre- and post-CDSS periods using random intercept models. Hemoglobin levels of 10 to 12 g/dL were defined as the on-target range. Physician compliance was defined as the concordance of adjustments of the erythropoietin-stimulating agent (ESA) between the CDSS recommendations and the actual physician prescriptions. RESULTS: We included 717 eligible patients on hemodialysis (mean age 62.9, SD 11.6 years; male n=430, 59.9%) with a total of 36,091 hemoglobin measurements (average hemoglobin and on-target rate were 11.1, SD 1.4, g/dL and 59.9%, respectively). The on-target rate decreased from 61.3% (pre-CDSS) to 56.2% (post-CDSS) owing to a high hemoglobin percentage of >12 g/dL (pre: 21.5%; post: 29%). The failure rate (hemoglobin <10 g/dL) decreased from 17.2% (pre-CDSS) to 14.8% (post-CDSS). The average weekly ESA use of 5848 (SD 4211) units per week did not differ between phases. The overall concordance between CDSS recommendations and physician prescriptions was 62.3%. The CDSS concordance increased from 56.2% to 78.6%. In the adjusted random intercept model, the post-CDSS phase showed increased hemoglobin by 0.17 (95% CI 0.14-0.21) g/dL, weekly ESA by 264 (95% CI 158-371) units per week, and 3.4-fold (95% CI 3.1-3.6) increased concordance rate. However, the on-target rate (29%; odds ratio 0.71, 95% CI 0.66-0.75) and failure rate (16%; odds ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.92) were reduced. After additional adjustments for concordance in the full models, increased hemoglobin and decreased on-target rate tended toward attenuation (from 0.17 to 0.13 g/dL and 0.71 to 0.73 g/dL, respectively). Increased ESA and decreased failure rate were completely mediated by physician compliance (from 264 to 50 units and 0.84 to 0.97, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirmed that physician compliance was a complete intermediate factor accounting for the efficacy of the CDSS. The CDSS reduced failure rates of anemia management through physician compliance. Our study highlights the importance of optimizing physician compliance in the design and implementation of CDSSs to improve patient outcomes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,023 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».