Cogprints

Clinical Decision Support System for Oncologist: Perception, Expectations and Implementation

Sinha, RK and Pai, MM and Vidyasagar, MS and Vadhiraja, BM (2012) Clinical Decision Support System for Oncologist: Perception, Expectations and Implementation. [Journal (On-line/Unpaginated)]

Full text available as:

[img]
Preview
 PDF - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution No Derivatives.
236Kb

Abstract

Background: Clinical Decision Support System is an integral application in modern healthcare practice to assist the clinicians with patient information and domain knowledge during patient care. Purpose: Assessment of perception and Identification of expectation are the prerequisite for the implementation of Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS). Methodology: A descriptive study was conducted among the 100 Oncologists of cancer hospitals and research centers of Southern India. A validated survey questionnaire related to the perception and expectation towards CDSS was provided to the participants and asked them to mark their response on a 5-Point Likert Scale i.e. from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. The time motion study was also conducted to understand the issues related to the access of patient information and domain knowledge. Result: The Oncologist perception towards CDSS was found to be significant where the Oncologists felt that the implementation of CDSS will decrease the cost of healthcare and increase the productivity of the hospital. The Oncologists expected that the system should have the features to automatically capture the clinical knowledge, practice guidelines and updates related to cancer care. The time motion study revealed that the Oncologists spend their maximum time in documentation & retrieval of patient information during patient care and evaluation because they largely depend on printed text. A web enabled CDSS is developed, implemented, and tested against the requirement of the Oncologists where the system was found to be highly acceptable by the Oncologists. Conclusion: The expectations of the end users should be fulfilled to make the CDSS more acceptable and sustainable as the similar result had been observed and found in the present research.

Item Type:Journal (On-line/Unpaginated)
Keywords:Perception; Expectation; Clinical Decision Support System; Oncology; Oncologist
Subjects:JOURNALS > Online Journal of Health and Allied Sciences
ID Code:8857
Deposited By: Kakkilaya Bevinje, Dr. Srinivas
Deposited On:04 May 2013 23:03
Last Modified:04 May 2013 23:03

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

1. Maserat E. Information communication technology: new approach for rural cancer care improvement. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2008 Oct-Dec; [Cited 2011 January 08]; 9(4):811-814. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19256781

2. Clinical Decision Making. Encyclopedia Britannica. [Cited 2011 January 10] Available from: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/121745/clinical-decision-making

3. Van Den Brink JL et al. An information system to support the care for head and neck cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. 2003 Jul; [Cited 2011 January 23];11(7):452-9. Epub 2003 Apr 18. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12707835

4. Human Papillomavirus and Related Cancer, Summary Report 2010 WHO/ICO. [Cited 2011 January 23]; Available from URL: http://www.who.int/hpvcentre/statistics/dynamic/ico/country_pdf/IND.pdf

5. Decision Support System. Open Clinical Knowledge Management for Medical Care. [Cited 2011 February 11]; Available from URL. http://www.openclinical.org/dss.html

6. Wong HJ, Legnini MW, Whitmore HH. Diffusion of decision support systems in healthcare: Are we there yet? Journal of Healthcare Management 2000;45 [Cited 2011 January 08]:240–249. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11067416

7. Badran IG. Knowledge, attitude and practice the three pillars of excellence and wisdom: a place in the medical profession. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal 1995;1(1):8-16

8. Lindenauer et al. Physician Characteristics, attitude and use of computer order entry. Journal of Hospital Medicine. July-August 2006;1(4):221-230. DOI: 10.1002/jhm.106

9. Al-Hajjaj MS, Bamgboye EA. Attitude and Opinion of medical staff towards computers. Computers in Biology and Medicine. 1992;22(4):221-226. doi:10.1016/0010-4825(92)90061-Q

10. Liaw ST, Pearce CM, Chondros P, McGrath BP, Piggford L, Jones K. Doctors' perceptions and attitudes to prescribing within the Authority Prescribing System. MJA 2003;178(5):203-206.

11. Young DW. Doctors Attitude to Computer Based Clinical Information System. Methods of Information in Medicine 1981;20:196-199.

12. Doormaal JE et al. Computerized Physician Order Entry System: Expectation and Experiences of users. Journal of Evaluation of Clinical Practice. August 2010;16(4):738-743. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01187.x

13. Clark C. Doctors Need Decision Support in Ordering Imaging Diagnostics. IMGMA Medical Group Management Association, July 28, 2010.

14. Carroll C et al. Involving Users in the design and usability evaluation of a clinical decision support system. Computer Methods Programs Biomed. Aug 2002;69(2):123-135

15. Creswell JW. Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. 1994

16. Garg AX et al. Effects of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient Outcomes. JAMA. 2005;293(10):1223-1238. Available at http://www.csee.umbc.edu/~mgrass2/cmsc691/P_Effects%20 of%20Computerized%20Clinical%20Decision%20Support%20Systems.pdf

17. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support system: A Systematic Review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ 2005;330:765.

18. McMullin ST et al. Impact of an Evidence-Based Computerized Decision Support System on Primary Care Prescription Costs. Annals of Family Physician. 2004;2:494-498 doi: 10.1370/afm.233. Available at http://www.annfammed.org/content/2/5/494.full.pdf+html

19. Rosenbloom ST et al. Clinicians’ perceptions of clinical decision support integrated into computerized provider order entry. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2004;73:5:433-441.

20. Veronen H et al. What may help or hinder the implementation of computerized decision support systems (CDSSs): a focus group study with physicians. Family Practice 2008;25(3):162-167. Available at URL. http://fampra.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/3/162.full#xref-ref-10-1

21. Farzandipour M, Sadoughi F, Meidani Z. Hospital Information Systems User Needs Analysis: A Vendor Survey. Journal of Health Informatics in Developing Countries. Available at URL: http://www.jhidc.org/index.php/jhidc/article/viewPDFInterstitial/57/98

22. Rossos PG, Abrams H, Wu R, Bray P. Active Physician Participation Key to Smooth MOE/MAR Rollout. Healthcare Quarterly, 2006;10(Sp):58-64.

Metadata

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Cogprints is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.