Background <p>Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) are increasingly being used to promote the use of evidence-based practices and improve the quality of healthcare. Patient Blood Management (PBM), an evidence-based approach endorsed by the World Health Organization, focuses on optimizing transfusion practices. This study evaluates the usability of a newly designed CDSS and physicians’ compliance with the CDSS to support PBM implementation in Turkiye.</p> Methods <p>A cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess physicians’ experiences, attitudes, and the impact of CDSS on decision-making processes through a pilot CDSS program using a pop-up window initiated to improve the use of blood components in the Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital.</p> Results <p>The order of the 155 blood and blood components (BBC) via the Hospital Information System was assessed over two weeks, and a total of 155 physicians participated in the survey. Only 30.32% (<i>n</i> = 47) of participants read the pop-up window (PW), while 69.68% (<i>n</i> = 108) closed it without reviewing it. Although all physicians found PW beneficial and informative, most physicians (87%) did not alter their transfusion practices, as they believed BBC requests were made based on their knowledge on appropriate indications. It was observed that traditional face-to-face education increased the participants’ knowledge level and enabled them to read the information presented in PW.</p> Conclusions <p>Although physicians perceived the CDSS as a useful source of current literature information, the CDSS's impact on decision-making behavior was limited, and physicians’ overall compliance remained low (30.3%). Physicians with more than five years of experience had higher reading rates than those with less experience (60.0% vs. 27.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.02). Time constraints and heavy workload were reported as the main reasons limiting system use.</p> Clinical trial number <p>Not applicable.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Assessing physicians’ experiences with a clinical decision support system in patient blood management programme: a cross-sectional observational study

  • Eda Macit Aydın,
  • Şener Balas,
  • Nigar Ertuğrul Örüç,
  • Funda Atar,
  • Burcu Parlak,
  • Büşra Tezcan

摘要

Background

Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) are increasingly being used to promote the use of evidence-based practices and improve the quality of healthcare. Patient Blood Management (PBM), an evidence-based approach endorsed by the World Health Organization, focuses on optimizing transfusion practices. This study evaluates the usability of a newly designed CDSS and physicians’ compliance with the CDSS to support PBM implementation in Turkiye.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess physicians’ experiences, attitudes, and the impact of CDSS on decision-making processes through a pilot CDSS program using a pop-up window initiated to improve the use of blood components in the Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital.

Results

The order of the 155 blood and blood components (BBC) via the Hospital Information System was assessed over two weeks, and a total of 155 physicians participated in the survey. Only 30.32% (n = 47) of participants read the pop-up window (PW), while 69.68% (n = 108) closed it without reviewing it. Although all physicians found PW beneficial and informative, most physicians (87%) did not alter their transfusion practices, as they believed BBC requests were made based on their knowledge on appropriate indications. It was observed that traditional face-to-face education increased the participants’ knowledge level and enabled them to read the information presented in PW.

Conclusions

Although physicians perceived the CDSS as a useful source of current literature information, the CDSS's impact on decision-making behavior was limited, and physicians’ overall compliance remained low (30.3%). Physicians with more than five years of experience had higher reading rates than those with less experience (60.0% vs. 27.1%, p = 0.02). Time constraints and heavy workload were reported as the main reasons limiting system use.

Clinical trial number

Not applicable.