| Title |
Computerized Decision Support Improves Medication Review Effectiveness: An Experiment Evaluating the STRIP Assistant’s Usability
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drugs & Aging, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40266-015-0270-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michiel C. Meulendijk, Marco R. Spruit, A. Clara Drenth-van Maanen, Mattijs E. Numans, Sjaak Brinkkemper, Paul A. F. Jansen, Wilma Knol |
| Abstract |
Polypharmacy poses threats to patients' health. The Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing (STRIP) is a drug optimization process for conducting medication reviews in primary care. To effectively and efficiently incorporate this method into daily practice, the STRIP Assistant-a decision support system that aims to assist physicians with the pharmacotherapeutic analysis of patients' medical records-has been developed. It generates context-specific advice based on clinical guidelines. The aim of this study was to validate the STRIP Assistant's usability as a tool for physicians to optimize medical records for polypharmacy patients. In an online experiment, 42 physicians were asked to optimize medical records for two comparable polypharmacy patients, one in their usual manner and one using the STRIP Assistant. Changes in effectiveness were measured by comparing respondents' optimized medicine prescriptions with medication prepared by an expert panel of two geriatrician-pharmacologists. Efficiency was operationalized by recording the time the respondents took to optimize the two cases. User satisfaction was measured with the System Usability Scale (SUS). Independent and paired t tests were used for analysis. Medication optimization significantly improved with the STRIP Assistant. Appropriate decisions increased from 58 % without the STRIP Assistant to 76 % with it (p < 0.0001). Inappropriate decisions decreased from 42 % without the STRIP Assistant to 24 % with it (p < 0.0001). Participants spent significantly more time optimizing medication with the STRIP Assistant (24 min) than without it (13 min; p < 0.0001). They assigned it a below-average SUS score of 63.25. The STRIP Assistant improves the effectiveness of medication reviews for polypharmacy patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 4 | 17% |
| Canada | 4 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 9% |
| Ireland | 2 | 9% |
| Spain | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 9 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 65% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 149 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 16% |
| Researcher | 23 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 29 | 19% |
| Unknown | 24 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 22% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 20 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 17 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 31 | 20% |
| Unknown | 37 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,068,304
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Drugs & Aging
#102
of 1,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,598
of 268,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs & Aging
#2
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,228 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,558 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.