IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0247270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of patients’ hospital discharge preferences on uptake of clinical decision support

Author

Listed:
  • James C Cox
  • Ira L Leeds
  • Vjollca Sadiraj
  • Kurt E Schnier
  • John F Sweeney

Abstract

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services identified unplanned hospital readmissions as a critical healthcare quality and cost problem. Improvements in hospital discharge decision-making and post-discharge care are needed to address the problem. Utilization of clinical decision support (CDS) can improve discharge decision-making but little is known about the empirical significance of two opposing problems that can occur: (1) negligible uptake of CDS by providers or (2) over-reliance on CDS and underuse of other information. This paper reports an experiment where, in addition to electronic medical records (EMR), clinical decision-makers are provided subjective reports by standardized patients, or CDS information, or both. Subjective information, reports of being eager or reluctant for discharge, was obtained during examinations of standardized patients, who are regularly employed in medical education, and in our experiment had been given scripts for the experimental treatments. The CDS tool presents discharge recommendations obtained from econometric analysis of data from de-identified EMR of hospital patients. 38 clinical decision-makers in the experiment, who were third and fourth year medical students, discharged eight simulated patient encounters with an average length of stay 8.1 in the CDS supported group and 8.8 days in the control group. When the recommendation was “Discharge,” CDS uptake of “Discharge” recommendation was 20% higher for eager than reluctant patients. Compared to discharge decisions in the absence of patient reports: (i) odds of discharging reluctant standardized patients were 67% lower in the CDS-assisted group and 40% lower in the control (no-CDS) group; whereas (ii) odds of discharging eager standardized patients were 75% higher in the control group and similar in CDS-assisted group. These findings indicate that participants were neither ignoring nor over-relying on CDS.

Suggested Citation

  • James C Cox & Ira L Leeds & Vjollca Sadiraj & Kurt E Schnier & John F Sweeney, 2021. "Effects of patients’ hospital discharge preferences on uptake of clinical decision support," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-15, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247270
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247270
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247270
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247270&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0247270?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.