Effect of a clinical evidence technology on patient skin disease outcomes in primary care: a clusterrandomized controlled trial.

Objective: Providers' use of clinical evidence technologies (CETs) improves their diagnosis and treatment decisions. Despite these benefits, few studies have evaluated the impact of CETs on patient outcomes. The investigators evaluated the effect of one CET, VisualDx, on skin problem outcomes in pri...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of the Medical Library Association Vol. 107; no. 2; pp. 151 - 163
Autores principales: Burke, Marianne, Littenberg, Benjamin
Formato: research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article
Publicado: University of Pittsburgh, University Library System Apr2019
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=135961079&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 135961079
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        15365050
        PI8
      jtl: Journal of the Medical Library Association
      issn: 15365050
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Apr2019
      vid: 107
      iid: 2
      pid: 60406
      pub: University of Pittsburgh, University Library System
      place: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    artinfo:
      ui:
        135961079
        135961079
        135961079
        10.5195/jmla.2019.581
        135961079
      ppf: 151
      ppct: 12
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Effect of a clinical evidence technology on patient skin disease outcomes in primary care: a clusterrandomized controlled trial.
      aug:
        au:
          Burke, Marianne
          Littenberg, Benjamin
        affil: Medical Library, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405
      sug:
        subj:
          Skin Diseases Therapy
          Technology, Medical
          Primary Health Care
          Outcomes (Health Care)
          Human
          Randomized Controlled Trials
          Random Assignment
          Medical Practice, Evidence-Based
          Cluster Analysis
          Ambulatory Care Facilities
          United States
          Cox Proportional Hazards Model
          Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test
          Logistic Regression
          Confidence Intervals
          Odds Ratio
          Electronic Health Records
          Interviews
          Data Analysis Software
      ab: Objective: Providers' use of clinical evidence technologies (CETs) improves their diagnosis and treatment decisions. Despite these benefits, few studies have evaluated the impact of CETs on patient outcomes. The investigators evaluated the effect of one CET, VisualDx, on skin problem outcomes in primary care. Methods: A cluster-randomized controlled pragmatic trial was conducted in outpatient clinics at an academic medical center in the northeastern United States. Participants were primary care providers (PCPs) and their adult patients seen for skin problems. The intervention was VisualDx, as used by PCPs. Outcomes were patient-reported time from index clinic visit to problem resolution, and the number of follow-up visits to any provider for the same problem. PCPs who were randomly assigned to the intervention agreed to use VisualDx as their primary evidence source for skin problems. Control group PCPs agreed not to use VisualDx. Investigators collected outcome data from patients by phone at thirty-day intervals. Cox proportional hazards models assessed time to resolution. Wilcoxon-rank sum tests and logistic regression compared the need for return appointments. Results: Thirty-two PCPs and 433 patients participated. In proportional hazards modelling adjusted for provider clusters, the time from index visit to skin problem resolution was similar in both groups (hazard ratio=0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.70, 1.21; p=0.54). Patient follow-up appointments did not differ significantly between groups (odds ratio=1.26; CI=0.94, 1.70; p=0.29). Conclusion: This pragmatic trial tested the effectiveness of VisualDx on patient-reported skin disease outcomes in a generalizable clinical setting. There was no difference in skin problem resolution or number of follow-up visits when PCPs used VisualDx.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        randomized controlled trial
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N