The Effect of Implementation of Guideline Order Bundles Into a General Admission Order Set on Clinical Practice Guideline Adoption: Quasi-Experimental Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and associated order sets can help standardize patient care and lead to higher-value patient care. However, difficult access and poor usability of these order sets can result in lower use rates and reduce the CPGs' impact on clinical outcomes. At our institution, we identified multiple CPGs for general pediatrics admissions where the appropriate order set was used in <50% of eligible encounters, leading to decreased adoption of CPG recommendations. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine how integrating disease-specific order groups into a common general admission order set influences adoption of CPG-specific order bundles for patients meeting CPG inclusion criteria admitted to the general pediatrics service. METHODS: We integrated order bundles for asthma, heavy menstrual bleeding, musculoskeletal infection, migraine, and pneumonia into a common general pediatrics order set. We compared pre- and postimplementation order bundle use rates for eligible encounters at both an intervention and nonintervention site for integrated CPGs. We also assessed order bundle adoption for nonintegrated CPGs, including bronchiolitis, acute gastroenteritis, and croup. In a post hoc analysis of encounters without order bundle use, we compared the pre- and postintervention frequency of diagnostic uncertainty at the time of admission. RESULTS: CPG order bundle use rates for incorporated CPGs increased by +9.8% (from 629/856, 73.5% to 405/486, 83.3%) at the intervention site and by +5.1% (896/1351, 66.3% to 509/713, 71.4%) at the nonintervention site. Order bundle adoption for nonintegrated CPGs decreased from 84% (536/638) to 68.5% (148/216), driven primarily by decreases in bronchiolitis order bundle adoption in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. Diagnostic uncertainty was more common in admissions without CPG order bundle use after implementation (28/227, 12.3% vs 19/81, 23.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The integration of CPG-specific order bundles into a general admission order set improved overall CPG adoption. However, integrating only some CPGs may reduce adoption of order bundles for excluded CPGs. Diagnostic uncertainty at the time of admission is likely an underrecognized barrier to guideline adherence that is not addressed by an integrated admission order set.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".