Carla Fernández-Barceló , Elena Calvo-Cidoncha , Laura Sampietro-Colom
{"title":"药物充足性临床决策支持系统的有效方法:最佳技术采用的整体评估","authors":"Carla Fernández-Barceló , Elena Calvo-Cidoncha , Laura Sampietro-Colom","doi":"10.1016/j.hlpt.2023.100811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Lately, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) has narrowed its scope to analyses of mainly clinical and economic benefits. Recent challenges emphasize the need for holistic assessments to obtain accurate recommendations for decision-making considering empirical facts and stakeholder's values. VALIDATE approach considers stakeholder's views and empirical facts allowing for more comprehensive HTAs. This study frames the assessment for clinical decision support systems (CDSS) using VALIDATE.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic review of the literature was conducted to gather evidence on the CDSS's effectiveness and published stakeholder perspectives. Considering the retrieved information, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders were conducted to uncover issues around CDSSs such as problem definition regarding the occurrence of medication errors, judgement of existing preventive methods and previous experiences with CDSSs, background theories regarding thoughts on future impact and personal beliefs, and barriers/facilitators for implementation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>When including multi-stakeholder views, reasons different from the literature are shown to interfere with CDSS acceptance/implementation, such as: i) Occurrence of ME (no traceability of medication taken/poor patient empowerment), ii) Technology as a tool to prevent ME (insufficient if only implemented at one point-of-care), iii) Previous experiences with CDSSs (low CDSSs development due to drug prescription being lastly digitalized in hospitals) and iv) CDSSs metrics (data inputted should be measured to control CDSSs performance).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Including multi-stakeholders views in scoping technology evaluation brings added value and new information for the assessment, resulting in more comprehensive assessment; otherwise, it can lead to inaccurate information resulting in inaccurate decisions on if, when and how to adopt CDSS.</p></div><div><h3>Public Interest Summary</h3><p>Including varied stakeholders into health technology assessment provides a deeper understanding of what value can a technology bring in. The present study develops a framework to assess clinical decision support systems (CDSS) considering different stakeholders. They were interviewed to understand their perspective on different parts of the problem CDSSs try to solve (medication errors) and the solution itself (CDSSs). Some reasons on the interviews were different from the literature published so far, that are shown to hinder CDSS acceptance/implementation, such as: no traceability of medication taken/poor patient empowerment, CDSSs being insufficient if only implemented at one point-of-care, low CDSSs development due to drug prescription being lastly digitalized in hospitals and CDSS metrics (data inputted should be measured to control CDSSs performance). This approach can improve both implementation chances and posterior assessment of CDSSs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48672,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"VALIDATE approach on medication adequacy clinical decision support systems: Holistic assessment for optimal technology adoption\",\"authors\":\"Carla Fernández-Barceló , Elena Calvo-Cidoncha , Laura Sampietro-Colom\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hlpt.2023.100811\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Lately, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) has narrowed its scope to analyses of mainly clinical and economic benefits. Recent challenges emphasize the need for holistic assessments to obtain accurate recommendations for decision-making considering empirical facts and stakeholder's values. VALIDATE approach considers stakeholder's views and empirical facts allowing for more comprehensive HTAs. This study frames the assessment for clinical decision support systems (CDSS) using VALIDATE.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic review of the literature was conducted to gather evidence on the CDSS's effectiveness and published stakeholder perspectives. Considering the retrieved information, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders were conducted to uncover issues around CDSSs such as problem definition regarding the occurrence of medication errors, judgement of existing preventive methods and previous experiences with CDSSs, background theories regarding thoughts on future impact and personal beliefs, and barriers/facilitators for implementation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>When including multi-stakeholder views, reasons different from the literature are shown to interfere with CDSS acceptance/implementation, such as: i) Occurrence of ME (no traceability of medication taken/poor patient empowerment), ii) Technology as a tool to prevent ME (insufficient if only implemented at one point-of-care), iii) Previous experiences with CDSSs (low CDSSs development due to drug prescription being lastly digitalized in hospitals) and iv) CDSSs metrics (data inputted should be measured to control CDSSs performance).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Including multi-stakeholders views in scoping technology evaluation brings added value and new information for the assessment, resulting in more comprehensive assessment; otherwise, it can lead to inaccurate information resulting in inaccurate decisions on if, when and how to adopt CDSS.</p></div><div><h3>Public Interest Summary</h3><p>Including varied stakeholders into health technology assessment provides a deeper understanding of what value can a technology bring in. The present study develops a framework to assess clinical decision support systems (CDSS) considering different stakeholders. They were interviewed to understand their perspective on different parts of the problem CDSSs try to solve (medication errors) and the solution itself (CDSSs). Some reasons on the interviews were different from the literature published so far, that are shown to hinder CDSS acceptance/implementation, such as: no traceability of medication taken/poor patient empowerment, CDSSs being insufficient if only implemented at one point-of-care, low CDSSs development due to drug prescription being lastly digitalized in hospitals and CDSS metrics (data inputted should be measured to control CDSSs performance). This approach can improve both implementation chances and posterior assessment of CDSSs.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Policy and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Policy and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883723000874\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883723000874","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
VALIDATE approach on medication adequacy clinical decision support systems: Holistic assessment for optimal technology adoption
Introduction
Lately, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) has narrowed its scope to analyses of mainly clinical and economic benefits. Recent challenges emphasize the need for holistic assessments to obtain accurate recommendations for decision-making considering empirical facts and stakeholder's values. VALIDATE approach considers stakeholder's views and empirical facts allowing for more comprehensive HTAs. This study frames the assessment for clinical decision support systems (CDSS) using VALIDATE.
Methods
A systematic review of the literature was conducted to gather evidence on the CDSS's effectiveness and published stakeholder perspectives. Considering the retrieved information, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders were conducted to uncover issues around CDSSs such as problem definition regarding the occurrence of medication errors, judgement of existing preventive methods and previous experiences with CDSSs, background theories regarding thoughts on future impact and personal beliefs, and barriers/facilitators for implementation.
Results
When including multi-stakeholder views, reasons different from the literature are shown to interfere with CDSS acceptance/implementation, such as: i) Occurrence of ME (no traceability of medication taken/poor patient empowerment), ii) Technology as a tool to prevent ME (insufficient if only implemented at one point-of-care), iii) Previous experiences with CDSSs (low CDSSs development due to drug prescription being lastly digitalized in hospitals) and iv) CDSSs metrics (data inputted should be measured to control CDSSs performance).
Conclusion
Including multi-stakeholders views in scoping technology evaluation brings added value and new information for the assessment, resulting in more comprehensive assessment; otherwise, it can lead to inaccurate information resulting in inaccurate decisions on if, when and how to adopt CDSS.
Public Interest Summary
Including varied stakeholders into health technology assessment provides a deeper understanding of what value can a technology bring in. The present study develops a framework to assess clinical decision support systems (CDSS) considering different stakeholders. They were interviewed to understand their perspective on different parts of the problem CDSSs try to solve (medication errors) and the solution itself (CDSSs). Some reasons on the interviews were different from the literature published so far, that are shown to hinder CDSS acceptance/implementation, such as: no traceability of medication taken/poor patient empowerment, CDSSs being insufficient if only implemented at one point-of-care, low CDSSs development due to drug prescription being lastly digitalized in hospitals and CDSS metrics (data inputted should be measured to control CDSSs performance). This approach can improve both implementation chances and posterior assessment of CDSSs.
期刊介绍:
Health Policy and Technology (HPT), is the official journal of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM), a cross-disciplinary journal, which focuses on past, present and future health policy and the role of technology in clinical and non-clinical national and international health environments.
HPT provides a further excellent way for the FPM to continue to make important national and international contributions to development of policy and practice within medicine and related disciplines. The aim of HPT is to publish relevant, timely and accessible articles and commentaries to support policy-makers, health professionals, health technology providers, patient groups and academia interested in health policy and technology.
Topics covered by HPT will include:
- Health technology, including drug discovery, diagnostics, medicines, devices, therapeutic delivery and eHealth systems
- Cross-national comparisons on health policy using evidence-based approaches
- National studies on health policy to determine the outcomes of technology-driven initiatives
- Cross-border eHealth including health tourism
- The digital divide in mobility, access and affordability of healthcare
- Health technology assessment (HTA) methods and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of clinical and non-clinical health technologies
- Health and eHealth indicators and benchmarks (measure/metrics) for understanding the adoption and diffusion of health technologies
- Health and eHealth models and frameworks to support policy-makers and other stakeholders in decision-making
- Stakeholder engagement with health technologies (clinical and patient/citizen buy-in)
- Regulation and health economics