Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 May 1;18(3):327-34.
doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000094. Epub 2011 Mar 21.

Effects of clinical decision-support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a synthesis of high-quality systematic review findings

Monique W M Jaspers  1 , Marian Smeulers, Hester Vermeulen, Linda W Peute
Affiliations

Effects of clinical decision-support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a synthesis of high-quality systematic review findings

Monique W M Jaspers et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: To synthesize the literature on clinical decision-support systems' (CDSS) impact on healthcare practitioner performance and patient outcomes.

Design: Literature search on Medline, Embase, Inspec, Cinahl, Cochrane/Dare and analysis of high-quality systematic reviews (SRs) on CDSS in hospital settings. Two-stage inclusion procedure: (1) selection of publications on predefined inclusion criteria; (2) independent methodological assessment of preincluded SRs by the 11-item measurement tool, AMSTAR. Inclusion of SRs with AMSTAR score 9 or above. SRs were thereafter rated on level of evidence. Each stage was performed by two independent reviewers.

Results: 17 out of 35 preincluded SRs were of high methodological quality and further analyzed. Evidence that CDSS significantly impacted practitioner performance was found in 52 out of 91 unique studies of the 16 SRs examining this effect (57%). Only 25 out of 82 unique studies of the 16 SRs reported evidence that CDSS positively impacted patient outcomes (30%).

Conclusions: Few studies have found any benefits on patient outcomes, though many of these have been too small in sample size or too short in time to reveal clinically important effects. There is significant evidence that CDSS can positively impact healthcare providers' performance with drug ordering and preventive care reminder systems as most clear examples. These outcomes may be explained by the fact that these types of CDSS require a minimum of patient data that are largely available before the advice is (to be) generated: at the time clinicians make the decisions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Search flow for systematic review literature on clinical decision-support systems. Cochrane/Dare results were all duplicates of the other searches.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Institute of Medicine Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences, 2001 - PubMed
    1. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, et al. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996;312:71–2 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. Lancet 2003;362:1225–30 - PubMed
    1. Osheroff JA, Pifer EA, Teich JM, et al. Improving Outcomes with Clinical Decision Support: An Implementer's Guide. Chicago: Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, 2005
    1. Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Morgan D, et al. Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ 2005;330:68 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types