Clinical decision support tools: analysis of online drug information databases

被引:73
|
作者
Clauson, Kevin A.
Marsh, Wallace A.
Polen, Hyla H.
Seamon, Matthew J.
Ortiz, Blanca I.
机构
[1] Nova SE Univ, Coll Pharm W Palm Beach, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 USA
[2] Shenandoah Univ, Bernard J Dunn Sch Pharm, Winchester, VA USA
[3] Hlth Care Dist Palm Beach Cty, Delray Beach, FL USA
[4] Nova SE Univ, Coll Pharm, Davie, FL USA
[5] Nova SE Univ, Coll Pharm Ponce, Ponce, PR USA
关键词
PERSONAL DIGITAL ASSISTANTS; RESOURCES; SAFETY;
D O I
10.1186/1472-6947-7-7
中图分类号
R-058 [];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Online drug information databases are used to assist in enhancing clinical decision support. However, the choice of which online database to consult, purchase or subscribe to is likely made based on subjective elements such as history of use, familiarity, or availability during professional training. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical decision support tools for drug information by systematically comparing the most commonly used online drug information databases. Methods: Five commercially available and two freely available online drug information databases were evaluated according to scope (presence or absence of answer), completeness (the comprehensiveness of the answers), and ease of use. Additionally, a composite score integrating all three criteria was utilized. Fifteen weighted categories comprised of 158 questions were used to conduct the analysis. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square were used to summarize the evaluation components and make comparisons between databases. Scheffe's multiple comparison procedure was used to determine statistically different scope and completeness scores. The composite score was subjected to sensitivity analysis to investigate the effect of the choice of percentages for scope and completeness. Results: The rankings for the databases from highest to lowest, based on composite scores were Clinical Pharmacology, Micromedex, Lexi-Comp Online, Facts & Comparisons 4.0, Epocrates Online Premium, RxList.com, and Epocrates Online Free. Differences in scope produced three statistical groupings with Group 1 (best) performers being: Clinical Pharmacology, Micromedex, Facts & Comparisons 4.0, Lexi-Comp Online, Group 2: Epocrates Premium and RxList.com and Group 3: Epocrates Free (p < 0.05). Completeness scores were similarly stratified. Collapsing the databases into two groups by access (subscription or free), showed the subscription databases performed better than the free databases in the measured criteria (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Online drug information databases, which belong to clinical decision support, vary in their ability to answer questions across a range of categories.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] CLINICAL DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS CONTROLLER AND DNA DATABASES: POTENTIAL MISTAKES
    Nagay, A.
    Khamidullayeva, G.
    Srojidinova, N.
    Shakirova, N.
    Nagaev, S.
    JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 2017, 35 : E333 - E333
  • [42] Analysis of Ambiguous Information about Chemical Compounds in Online Databases
    Rusek, Martin
    Jancarik, Antonin
    EURASIA JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION, 2017, 13 (10) : 6533 - 6543
  • [43] Playing in the clinical decision support sandbox: tools and training for all
    Soares, Andrey
    Afshar, Majid
    Moesel, Chris
    Grasso, Michael A.
    Pan, Eric
    Solomonides, Anthony
    Richardson, Joshua E.
    Barone, Eleanor
    Lomotan, Edwin A.
    Schilling, Lisa M.
    JAMIA OPEN, 2023, 6 (02)
  • [44] Improving clinical decision support tools Challenges and a way forward
    Sweidan, Michelle
    Reeve, James
    Dartnell, Jonathan
    Phillips, Stephen
    AUSTRALIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 2011, 40 (08) : 561 - 562
  • [45] Making tools that work for us: Improving clinical decision support
    Liang, Danni
    Molloy, Matthew J.
    JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL MEDICINE, 2023, 18 (06) : 558 - 559
  • [46] Clinical Decision Support Tools for Reduced and Changing Kidney Function
    Schreier, Diana J.
    Barreto, Erin F.
    KIDNEY360, 2022, 3 (10): : 1657 - 1659
  • [47] Clinical Decision Support Tools and the COVID-19 Pandemic
    Kaiafas, Kristen N.
    JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN NURSING, 2020, 37 (03) : 192 - 192
  • [48] Brede Tools and Federating Online Neuroinformatics Databases
    Nielsen, Finn Arup
    NEUROINFORMATICS, 2014, 12 (01) : 27 - 37
  • [49] Development of NIST Atomic Databases and Online Tools
    Ralchenko, Yuri
    Kramida, Alexander
    ATOMS, 2020, 8 (03)
  • [50] Decision tools for life support: A review and policy analysis
    Giacomini, M
    Cook, D
    DeJean, D
    Shaw, R
    Gedge, E
    CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2006, 34 (03) : 864 - 870