Just how is anyone supposed to tell whether clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are achieving their intended goals if not enough people are using them? Researchers from Duke University set out to prove the case for adoption of CDSSs "outside of experienced academic centers," and published the results of their investigation in The Annals of Internal Medicine.
"Healthcare technology continues to come under fire for failing to deliver results--whether lower costs, increased efficiency, better clinical outcomes," researchers wrote in their abstract. "This time researchers are turning their critical eye to clinical decision support."
And a critical eye it is. After a systematic review of nearly 150 randomized control-study trials, "evidence for clinical, economic, workload and efficiency outcomes [aided by CDSSs] remains sparse," read the study.
Decision support could inspire better clinical outcomes, workload and efficiency improvements, increased patient satisfaction, and reduced cost, say researchers--but there's just not enough evidence available for them to conclude outright that it does so. Researchers are advocating for further investigation.