Andrew M. Secor , John Justafort , Chenet Torrilus , Jean Guy Honoré , Sharon Kiche , Tracy K. Sandifer , Kristin Beima-Sofie , Anjuli D. Wagner , Jillian Pintye , Nancy Puttkammer
{"title":"“Following the data”: Perceptions of and willingness to use clinical decision support tools to inform HIV care among Haitian clinicians","authors":"Andrew M. Secor , John Justafort , Chenet Torrilus , Jean Guy Honoré , Sharon Kiche , Tracy K. Sandifer , Kristin Beima-Sofie , Anjuli D. Wagner , Jillian Pintye , Nancy Puttkammer","doi":"10.1016/j.hlpt.2024.100880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Clinical decision support (CDS) tools can support HIV care, including through case tracking, treatment and medication monitoring, and promoting provider compliance with care guidelines. There has been limited research into the technical, organizational, and behavioral factors that impact perceptions of and willingness to use CDS tools at scale in resource-limited settings, including in Haiti.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Our sample included fifteen purposively chosen Haitian HIV program experts, including active clinicians and HIV program managers. Participants completed structured quantitative surveys and one-on-one qualitative semi-structured interviews.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Study participants had high levels of familiarity and experience with CDS tools. The primary motivator for CDS tool use was a perceived benefit to quality of care, including improved provider time use, efficiency, and decision-making ability, and patient outcomes. Participants highlighted decision-making autonomy and how CDS tools could support provider decision making but should not supplant provider knowledge and experience. Participants highlighted the need for sufficient provider training/sensitization, inclusion of providers in the system design process, and prioritization of tool user-friendliness as key mechanisms to drive tool use and impact. Some participants noted that systemic issues, such as limited laboratory capacity, may reduce the usefulness of CDS alerts, particularly concerning differentiated care and priority viral load testing.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Respondents had largely positive perceptions of EMRs and CDS tools, particularly due to perceived improvements in quality of care. To improve tool use, stakeholders should prioritize tool user-friendliness and provider training. Addressing systemic health system issues is necessary to unlock the full potential of these tools.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48672,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy and Technology","volume":"13 3","pages":"Article 100880"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883724000431","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Clinical decision support (CDS) tools can support HIV care, including through case tracking, treatment and medication monitoring, and promoting provider compliance with care guidelines. There has been limited research into the technical, organizational, and behavioral factors that impact perceptions of and willingness to use CDS tools at scale in resource-limited settings, including in Haiti.
Methods
Our sample included fifteen purposively chosen Haitian HIV program experts, including active clinicians and HIV program managers. Participants completed structured quantitative surveys and one-on-one qualitative semi-structured interviews.
Results
Study participants had high levels of familiarity and experience with CDS tools. The primary motivator for CDS tool use was a perceived benefit to quality of care, including improved provider time use, efficiency, and decision-making ability, and patient outcomes. Participants highlighted decision-making autonomy and how CDS tools could support provider decision making but should not supplant provider knowledge and experience. Participants highlighted the need for sufficient provider training/sensitization, inclusion of providers in the system design process, and prioritization of tool user-friendliness as key mechanisms to drive tool use and impact. Some participants noted that systemic issues, such as limited laboratory capacity, may reduce the usefulness of CDS alerts, particularly concerning differentiated care and priority viral load testing.
Conclusion
Respondents had largely positive perceptions of EMRs and CDS tools, particularly due to perceived improvements in quality of care. To improve tool use, stakeholders should prioritize tool user-friendliness and provider training. Addressing systemic health system issues is necessary to unlock the full potential of these tools.
期刊介绍:
Health Policy and Technology (HPT), is the official journal of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM), a cross-disciplinary journal, which focuses on past, present and future health policy and the role of technology in clinical and non-clinical national and international health environments.
HPT provides a further excellent way for the FPM to continue to make important national and international contributions to development of policy and practice within medicine and related disciplines. The aim of HPT is to publish relevant, timely and accessible articles and commentaries to support policy-makers, health professionals, health technology providers, patient groups and academia interested in health policy and technology.
Topics covered by HPT will include:
- Health technology, including drug discovery, diagnostics, medicines, devices, therapeutic delivery and eHealth systems
- Cross-national comparisons on health policy using evidence-based approaches
- National studies on health policy to determine the outcomes of technology-driven initiatives
- Cross-border eHealth including health tourism
- The digital divide in mobility, access and affordability of healthcare
- Health technology assessment (HTA) methods and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of clinical and non-clinical health technologies
- Health and eHealth indicators and benchmarks (measure/metrics) for understanding the adoption and diffusion of health technologies
- Health and eHealth models and frameworks to support policy-makers and other stakeholders in decision-making
- Stakeholder engagement with health technologies (clinical and patient/citizen buy-in)
- Regulation and health economics