Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Services Research & Development

Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Provider response to computer-based care suggestions for chronic heart failure.

Keeffe B, Subramanian U, Tierney WM, Udris E, Willems J, McDonell M, Fihn SD. Provider response to computer-based care suggestions for chronic heart failure. Medical care. 2005 May 1; 43(5):461-5.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.
   Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions



Abstract:

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the responses of providers to recommendations generated by a computer-management system for chronic heart failure (CHF). METHODS: This study is an analysis of primary care providers' responses to evidence-based computer-generated suggestions regarding patients with CHF at one center of a randomized trial. The trial randomized primary care providers from 2 VA Medical Centers to receive care suggestions regarding patients with CHF, with or without inclusion of patient symptom data obtained from pre-visit questionnaires. At one center, providers were asked to respond to the suggestions with hand-written comments and a numerical agreement scale. RESULTS: Providers responded to 774 care suggestions (62% of the 1246 delivered). They agreed with 41%, had major disagreements with 12%, and had minor disagreements with 22%. For 7% of the care suggestions, providers asked to not see it again for that patient. The most common reasons for major or minor disagreements were a belief that the suggestion was wrong or unnecessary (45%) or would not be tolerated by the patient (32%). External barriers to implementation of guidelines, lack of guideline awareness, or disagreement with guidelines were uncommon reasons cited by providers in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Providers agreed with less than half of computer-generated care suggestions from evidence-based CHF guidelines, most often because the suggestions were felt to be inapplicable to their patients or unlikely to be tolerated.





Questions about the HSR&D website? Email the Web Team.

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.