BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

BackgroundSystematic reviews or randomised-controlled trials usually help to establish the effectiveness of drugs and other health technologies, but are rarely sufficient by themselves to ensure actual clinical use of the technology. The process from innovation to routine clinical use is complex. Numerous computerised decision support systems (DSS) have been developed, but many fail to be taken up into actual use. Some developers construct technologically advanced systems with little relevance to the real world. Others did not determine whether a clinical need exists. With NHS investing £5 billion in computer systems, also occurring in other countries, there is an urgent need to shift from a technology-driven approach to one that identifies and employs the most cost-effective method to manage knowledge, regardless of the technology. The generic term, 'decision tool' (DT), is therefore suggested to demonstrate that these aids, which seem different technically, are conceptually the same from a clinical viewpoint.DiscussionMany computerised DSSs failed for various reasons, for example, they were not based on best available knowledge; there was insufficient emphasis on their need for high quality clinical data; their development was technology-led; or evaluation methods were misapplied. We argue that DSSs and other computer-based, paper-based and even mechanical decision aids are members of a wider family of decision tools. A DT is an active knowledge resource that uses patient data to generate case specific advice, which supports decision making about individual patients by health professionals, the patients themselves or others concerned about them. The identification of DTs as a consistent and important category of health technology should encourage the sharing of lessons between DT developers and users and reduce the frequency of decision tool projects focusing only on technology. The focus of evaluation should become more clinical, with the impact of computer-based DTs being evaluated against other computer, paper- or mechanical tools, to identify the most cost effective tool for each clinical problem.SummaryWe suggested the generic term 'decision tool' to demonstrate that decision-making aids, such as computerised DSSs, paper algorithms, and reminders are conceptually the same, so the methods to evaluate them should be the same.

[1]  Jeremy Wyatt,et al.  Decision Aids and the Law , 1989, The Lancet.

[2]  V. Entwistle,et al.  Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review , 1999, BMJ.

[3]  J. Steurer,et al.  Accuracy of Ottawa ankle rules to exclude fractures of the ankle and mid-foot: systematic review , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[4]  Maria Donawa FDA final guidance on software validation. , 2002, Medical device technology.

[5]  G H Guyatt,et al.  Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: XVIII. How to use an article evaluating the clinical impact of a computer-based clinical decision support system. , 1999, JAMA.

[6]  L. S. Murray,et al.  Does prediction of outcome alter patient management? , 1993, The Lancet.

[7]  P Jacklin,et al.  Joint teleconsultations (virtual outreach) versus standard outpatient appointments for patients referred by their general practitioner for a specialist opinion: a randomised trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[8]  R. Kane,et al.  The effects of clinical pathways for renal transplant on patient outcomes and length of stay. , 1998, Medical care.

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

[10]  F. Grémy,et al.  Information systems evaluation and subjectivity , 1999, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[11]  David Parkin,et al.  Effect of computerised evidence based guidelines on management of asthma and angina in adults in primary care: cluster randomised controlled trial , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  J C Wyatt,et al.  3. Practice guidelines and other support for clinical innovation , 2000, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[13]  J. Wyatt,et al.  Clinical data systems, part 3: development and evaluation , 1994, The Lancet.

[14]  Joint British recommendations on prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice: summary , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[15]  J. Wyatt,et al.  Basic concepts in medical informatics , 2002, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[16]  A Hart,et al.  Evaluating black-boxes as medical decision aids: issues arising from a study of neural networks. , 1990, Medical informatics = Medecine et informatique.

[17]  I. Adams,et al.  Computer aided diagnosis of acute abdominal pain: a multicentre study. , 1986, British medical journal.

[18]  R. Neville,et al.  Controlled trial of an audit facilitator in diagnosis and treatment of childhood asthma in general practice , 1995, BMJ.

[19]  A D Oxman,et al.  Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies. , 1995, JAMA.

[20]  British Cardiac Society,et al.  Joint British recommendations on prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice: summary , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[21]  C. McDonald,et al.  A computerized reminder system to increase the use of preventive care for hospitalized patients. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  G. Teasdale Learning from Bristol: report of the public inquiry into children's heart surgery at Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984-1995 , 2002, British journal of neurosurgery.

[23]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Field trials of medical decision-aids: potential problems and solutions. , 1991, Proceedings. Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care.

[24]  R J Lilford,et al.  Effect of using protocols on medical care: randomised trial of three methods of taking an antenatal history. , 1992, BMJ.

[25]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Effect of audit and feedback, and reminder messages on primary-care radiology referrals: a randomised trial , 2001, The Lancet.

[26]  Alain Martinot,et al.  Validation of the paediatric logistic organ dysfunction (PELOD) score: prospective, observational, multicentre study , 2003, The Lancet.

[27]  R. Hanka,et al.  Evaluating information technology in health care: barriers and challenges , 1998, BMJ.

[28]  T. L. Williams,et al.  Systematic review of cost effectiveness studies of telemedicine interventions , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[29]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. , 1993, JAMA.

[30]  Paul Taylor,et al.  Research Paper: Use of a Computerized Guideline for Glucose Regulation in the Intensive Care Unit Improved Both Guideline Adherence and Glucose Regulation , 2004, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..