Đang chuẩn bị liên kết để tải về tài liệu:
báo cáo khoa học: "Computerized clinical decision support systems for chronic disease management: A decisionmaker-researcher partnership systematic review"

Tuyển tập báo cáo các nghiên cứu khoa học quốc tế ngành y học dành cho các bạn tham khảo đề tài:Computerized clinical decision support systems for chronic disease management: A decisionmaker-researcher partnership systematic review | Roshanov et al. Implementation Science 2011 6 92 http www.implementationscience.eom content 6 1 92 Implementation Science IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Open Access Computerized clinical decision support systems for chronic disease management A decisionmaker-researcher partnership systematic review D s ỉ I c D - I- n s z 1 Chỉl h s h I I r r 2 I_I S-. I r I 3 4 A Ỉ - V CT s 5 Dz I ĩ I c n s I -J 4-3 I -s A h I s r I s 6 ravel S Roshanov ShiKha Misra Hertzel C Gerstein Amu X Garg Rolf J Sebaldt Jean A MacKay Lorraine Weise-Kelly6 Tamara Navarro6 Nancy L WilczynsKi6 and R Brian Haynes3 4 6 for the CCDSS Systematic Review Team Abstract Background The use of computerized clinical decision support systems CCDSSs may improve chronic disease management which requires recurrent visits to multiple health professionals ongoing disease and treatment monitoring and patient behavior modification. The objective of this review was to determine if CCDSSs improve the processes of chronic care such as diagnosis treatment and monitoring of disease and associated patient outcomes such as effects on biomarKers and clinical exacerbations . Methods We conducted a decision-maKer-researcher partnership systematic review. We searched MEDLINE EMBASE Ovid s EBM Reviews database Inspec and reference lists for potentially eligible articles published up to January 2010. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the use of CCDSSs to usual practice or non-CCDSS controls. Trials were eligible if at least one component of the CCDSS was designed to support chronic disease management. We considered studies positive if they showed a statistically significant improvement in at least 50 of relevant outcomes. Results Of 55 included trials 87 n 48 measured system impact on the process of care and 52 n 25 of those demonstrated statistically significant improvements. Sixty-five percent 36 55 of trials measured impact on typically non-major surrogate patient outcomes and 31 n 11 of .