Do clinical decision support tools improve quality of care outcomes in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Iva Buzancic,Harvey Jia Wei Koh,Caroline Trin,Caitlin Nash,Maja Ortner Hadziabdic,Dora Belec,Sophia Zoungas,Ella Zomer,Lachlan Dalli,Zanfina Ademi,Bryan Chua,Stella Talic
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpc.2024.100855
2024-09-20
Abstract:Aim: To assess the effectiveness of Clinical Decision Support Tools (CDSTs) in enhancing the quality of care outcomes in primary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, and included searches in Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials of CDSTs comprising digital notifications in electronic health systems (EHS/EHR) in various primary healthcare settings, published post-2013, in patients with CVD risks and without established CVD. Two reviewers independently assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB-2 tool. Attainment of clinical targets was analysed using a Restricted Maximum Likelihood random effects meta-analysis. Other relevant outcomes were narratively synthesised due to heterogeneity of studies and outcome metrics. Results: Meta-analysis revealed CDSTs showed improvement in systolic (Mean Standardised Difference (MSD)=0.39, 95 %CI=-0.31, -1.10) and diastolic blood pressure target achievement (MSD=0.34, 95 %CI=-0.24, -0.92), but had no significant impact on lipid (MSD=0.01; 95 %CI=-0.10, 0.11) or glucose target attainment (MSD=-0.19, 95 %CI=-0.66, 0.28). The CDSTs with active prompts increased statin initiation and improved patients' adherence to clinical appointments but had minimal effect on other medications and on enhancing adherence to medication. Conclusion: CDSTs were found to be effective in improving blood pressure clinical target attainments. However, the presence of multi-layered barriers affecting the uptake, longer-term use and active engagement from both clinicians and patients may hinder the full potential for achieving other quality of care outcomes. Lay summary: The study aimed to evaluate how Clinical Decision Support Tools (CDSTs) impact the quality of care for primary cardiovascular disease (CVD) management. CDSTs are tools designed to support healthcare professionals in delivering the best possible care to patients by providing timely and relevant information at the point of care (ie. digital notifications in electronic health systems). Although CDST are designed to improve the quality of healthcare outcomes, the current evidence of their effectiveness is inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis, to quantify the effectiveness of CDSTs. The eligibility criteria targeted patients with CVD risk factors, but without diagnosed CVD. The meta-analysis found that CDSTs showed improvement in systolic and diastolic blood pressure target achievement but did not significantly impact lipid or glucose target attainment. Specifically, CDSTs showed effectiveness in increasing statin prescribing but not antihypertensives or antidiabetics prescribing. Interventions with CDSTs aimed at increasing screening programmes were effective for patients with kidney diseases and high-risk patients, but not for patients with diabetes or teenage patients with hypertension. Alerts were effective in improving patients' adherence to clinical appointments but not in medication adherence. This study suggests CDSTs are effective in enhancing a limited number of quality of care outcomes in primary CVD prevention, but there is need for future research to explore the mechanisms and context of multiple barriers that may hinder the full potential for cardiovascular health outcomes to be achieved.