How do medical doctors use a web-based oncology protocol system? A comparison of Australian doctors at different levels of medical training using logfile analysis and an online survey

BackgroundElectronic decision support is commonplace in medical practice. However, its adoption at the point-of-care is dependent on a range of organisational, patient and clinician-related factors. In particular, level of clinical experience is an important driver of electronic decision support uptake. Our objective was to examine the way in which Australian doctors at different stages of medical training use a web-based oncology system (http://www.eviq.org.au).MethodsWe used logfiles to examine the characteristics of eviQ registrants (2009–2012) and patterns of eviQ use in 2012, according to level of medical training. We also used a web-based survey to evaluate the way doctors at different levels of medical training use the online system and to elicit perceptions of the system’s utility in oncology care.ResultsOur study cohort comprised 2,549 eviQ registrants who were hospital-based medical doctors across all levels of training. 65% of the cohort used eviQ in 2012, with 25% of interns/residents, 61% of advanced oncology trainees and 47% of speciality-qualified oncologists accessing eviQ in the last 3 months of 2012. The cohort accounted for 445,492 webhits in 2012. On average, advanced trainees used eviQ up to five-times more than other doctors (42.6 webhits/month compared to 22.8 for specialty-qualified doctors and 7.4 webhits/month for interns/residents). Of the 52 survey respondents, 89% accessed eviQ’s chemotherapy protocols on a daily or weekly basis in the month prior to the survey. 79% of respondents used eviQ at least weekly to initiate therapy and to support monitoring (29%), altering (35%) or ceasing therapy (19%). Consistent with the logfile analysis, advanced oncology trainees report more frequent eviQ use than doctors at other stages of medical training.ConclusionsThe majority of the Australian oncology workforce are registered on eviQ. The frequency of use directly mirrors the clinical role of doctors and attitudes about the utility of eviQ in decision-making. Evaluations of this kind generate important data for system developers and medical educators to drive improvements in electronic decision support to better meet the needs of clinicians. This end-user focus will optimise the uptake of systems which will translate into improvements in processes of care and patient outcomes.

[1]  Anne Holbrook,et al.  Features predicting the success of computerized decision support for prescribing: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials , 2009, BMC Medical Informatics Decis. Mak..

[2]  H. Mcdonald,et al.  Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. , 2005, JAMA.

[3]  Shelley A. Rushton,et al.  Uptake of a web-based oncology protocol system: how do cancer clinicians use eviQ cancer treatments online? , 2013, BMC Cancer.

[4]  J. Langton,et al.  The quality of web-based oncology guidelines and protocols: how do international sites stack up? , 2011, British Journal of Cancer.

[5]  G. Baker,et al.  Patient safety in cancer care: a time for action. , 2007, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[6]  Sallie-Anne Pearson,et al.  Standardizing care in medical oncology , 2009, Cancer.

[7]  R. Haynes,et al.  Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. , 1998, JAMA.

[8]  Steven Ellis,et al.  Cancer Education and Effective Dissemination: Information Access is not Enough , 2010, Journal of Cancer Education.

[9]  A. Brandt A reader's guide to 200 years of the New England Journal of Medicine. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  R. Ward,et al.  Implementing a web‐based oncology protocol system in Australia: evaluation of the first 3 years of operation , 2012, Internal medicine journal.

[11]  I. Kohane,et al.  A glimpse of the next 100 years in medicine. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  David Newby,et al.  Do computerised clinical decision support systems for prescribing change practice? A systematic review of the literature (1990-2007) , 2009, BMC health services research.

[13]  L. Trinquart,et al.  Computerized advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice. , 2008, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[14]  J. Langton,et al.  Improving the quality of oncology guidelines and protocols , 2012 .

[15]  E. Balas,et al.  Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[16]  T. Shanafelt,et al.  Oncologist burnout: causes, consequences, and responses. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  Margaret Williamson,et al.  Computerized clinical decision support for prescribing: provision does not guarantee uptake. , 2010, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[18]  Elisabeth Burdick,et al.  Medication safety in the ambulatory chemotherapy setting , 2005, Cancer.

[19]  Paul Glasziou,et al.  The scatter of research: cross sectional comparison of randomised trials and systematic reviews across specialties , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[20]  Johanna I. Westbrook,et al.  Do online information retrieval systems help experienced clinicians answer clinical questions? , 2005, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[21]  J. Langton,et al.  eviQ cancer treatments online: How does the web‐based protocol system fare in a comprehensive quality assessment? , 2011, Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology.

[22]  J I Westbrook,et al.  Use of point‐of‐care online clinical evidence by junior and senior doctors in New South Wales public hospitals , 2005, Internal medicine journal.

[23]  Johanna I Westbrook,et al.  The Impact of an Online Evidence System on Confidence in Decision Making in a Controlled Setting , 2005, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[24]  B. Koczwara,et al.  The shortage of medical oncologists: the Australian Medical Oncologist Workforce Study , 2011, The Medical journal of Australia.

[25]  Suanna S Bruinooge,et al.  Future supply and demand for oncologists : challenges to assuring access to oncology services. , 2007, Journal of oncology practice.