Electronic risk assessment for venous thromboembolism: Investigating physicians' rationale for bypassing clinical decision support recommendations

9Citations
Citations of this article
90Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: The underutilisation of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is still a problem in the UK despite the emergence of national guidelines and incentives to increase the number of patients undergoing VTE risk assessments. Our objective was to examine the reasons doctors gave for not prescribing enoxaparin when recommended by an electronic VTE risk assessment alert. Design: We used a qualitative research design to conduct a thematic analysis of free text entered into an electronic prescribing system. Setting: The study took place in a large University teaching hospital, which has a locally developed electronic prescribing system known as PICS (Prescribing, Information and Communication System). Participants: We extracted prescription data from all inpatient admissions over a 7-month period in 2012 using the audit database of PICS. Intervention: The completion of the VTE risk assessment form introduced into the hospital-wide electronic prescribing and health records system is mandatory. Where doctors do not prescribe VTE prophylaxis when recommended, they are asked to provide a reason for this decision. The free-text field was introduced in May 2012. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Free-text reasons for not prescribing enoxaparin when recommended were thematically coded. Results: A total of 1136 free-text responses from 259 doctors were collected in the time period and 1206 separate reasons were analysed and coded. 389 reasons (32.3%) for not prescribing enoxaparin were coded as being due to 'clinical judgment'; in 288 (23.9%) of the responses, doctors were going to reassess the patient or prescribe enoxaparin; and in 245 responses (20.3%), the system was seen to have produced an inappropriate alert. Conclusions: In order to increase specificity of warnings and avoid users developing alert fatigue, it is essential that an evaluation of user responses and/or end user feedback as to the appropriateness and timing of alerts is obtained.

References Powered by Scopus

Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines?: A framework for improvement

5606Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Prevention of venous thromboembolism: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (8th edition)

3893Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Europe - The number of VTE events and associated morbidity and mortality

1434Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Venous thromboembolism quality measures fail to accurately measure quality

48Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Usability evaluation and implementation of a health information technology dashboard of evidence-based quality indicators

33Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Stepped-wedge randomised trial to evaluate population health intervention designed to increase appropriate anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation

14Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nwulu, U., Brooks, H., Richardson, S., McFarland, L., & Coleman, J. J. (2014). Electronic risk assessment for venous thromboembolism: Investigating physicians’ rationale for bypassing clinical decision support recommendations. BMJ Open, 4(9). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005647

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 33

66%

Researcher 11

22%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

8%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 40

75%

Nursing and Health Professions 8

15%

Social Sciences 3

6%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 2

4%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free