Uptake of a web-based oncology protocol system: how do cancer clinicians use eviQ cancer treatments online?

BMC Cancer

Sallie-Anne Pearson²  Robyn L Ward¹  Shelley Rushton³  Nicole Pesa²  Julia M Langton² 

[1]Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia

[2]Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

[3]Cancer Institute New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia

关键词: Health personnel;    Clinical oncology;    Cancer chemotherapy protocols;    Evidence-based practice;    Clinical decision support systems;   

Others  :  1079878
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2407-13-112

 received in 2012-11-16, accepted in 2013-03-05,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The use of computerized systems to support evidence-based practice is commonplace in contemporary medicine. Despite the prolific use of electronic support systems there has been relatively little research on the uptake of web-based systems in the oncology setting. Our objective was to examine the uptake of a web-based oncology protocol system (http://www.eviq.org.au webcite) by Australian cancer clinicians.

Methods

We used web-logfiles and Google Analytics to examine the characteristics of eviQ registrants from October 2009-December 2011 and patterns of use by cancer clinicians during a typical month.

Results

As of December 2011, there were 16,037 registrants; 85% of whom were Australian health care professionals. During a typical month 87% of webhits occurred in standard clinical hours (08:00 to 18:00 weekdays). Raw webhits were proportional to the size of clinician groups: nurses (47% of Australian registrants), followed by doctors (20%), and pharmacists (14%). However, pharmacists had up to three times the webhit rate of other clinical groups. Clinicians spent five times longer viewing chemotherapy protocol pages than other content and the protocols viewed reflect the most common cancers: lung, breast and colorectal.

Conclusions

Our results demonstrate eviQ is used by a range of health professionals involved in cancer treatment at the point-of-care. Continued monitoring of electronic decision support systems is vital to understanding how they are used in clinical practice and their impact on processes of care and patient outcomes.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Langton et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Grol R, Grimshaw J: From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet 2003, 362:1225-1230.
• [2]Vincent S, Djulbegovic B: Oncology treatment recommendations can be supported only by 1-2% of high-quality published evidence. Cancer Treat Rev 2005, 31:319-322.
• [3]Hoffmann T, Erueti C, Thorning S, Glasziou P: The scatter of research: cross sectional comparison of randomised trials and systematic reviews across specialties. BMJ 2012, 344:e3223.
• [4]Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I: Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010, 7:e1000326.
• [5]Langton JM, Drew AK, Mellish L, Olivier J, Ward RL, Pearson SA: The quality of web-based oncology guidelines and protocols: how do international sites stack up. Br J Cancer 2011, 105:1166-1172.
• [6]Moxey A, Robertson J, Newby D, Hains I, Williamson M, Pearson SA: Computerized clinical decision support for prescribing: provision does not guarantee uptake. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010, 17:25-33.
• [7]Greenberg A, Kramer S, Welch V, O’Sullivan E, Hall S: Cancer Care Ontario’s computerized physician order entry system: a province-wide patient safety innovation. Healthc Q 2006, 9 Spec No:108-113.
• [8]Bury J, Hurt C, Roy A, Cheesman L, Bradburn M, Cross S, Fox J, Saha V: LISA: a web-based decision-support system for trial management of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Br J Haematol 2005, 129:746-754.
• [9]Voeffray M, Pannatier A, Stupp R, Fucina N, Leyvraz S, Wasserfallen JB: Effect of computerisation on the quality and safety of chemotherapy prescription. Qual Saf Health Care 2006, 15:418-421.
• [10]Markert A, Thierry V, Kleber M, Behrens M, Engelhardt M: Chemotherapy safety and severe adverse events in cancer patients: Strategies to efficiently avoid chemotherapy errors in in- and outpatient treatment. Int J Cancer 2009, 124:722-728.
• [11]Hains IM, Fuller JM, Ward RL, Pearson SA: Standardizing care in medical oncology: are Web-based systems the answer? Cancer 2009, 115:5579-5588.
• [12]Hains IM, Ward RL, Pearson SA: Implementing a web-based oncology protocol system in Australia: evaluation of the first 3 years of operation. Intern Med J 2012, 42:57-64.
• [13]Westbrook JI, Gosling AS, Coiera E: Do clinicians use online evidence to support patient care? A study of 55,000 clinicians. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004, 11:113-120.
• [14]Gosling AS, Westbrook JI, Coiera EW: Variation in the use of online clinical evidence: a qualitative analysis. Int J Med Inform 2003, 69:1-16.
• [15]Langton JM, Pearson S-A: eviQ cancer treatments online: How does the web-based protocol system fare in a comprehensive quality assessment? Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2011, 7:357-363.
• [16]Rowland K, Schumann S-A: PURLs. Palliative care: earlier is better. J Fam Pract 2010, 59:695-698.
• [17]Tan EL, Stark H, Lowinger JS, Ringland C, Ward R, Pearson SA: Information sources used by New South Wales cancer clinicians: a qualitative study. Intern Med J 2006, 36:711-717.
• [18]Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E: Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010, 60:277-300.
• [19]Erikson C, Salsberg E, Forte G, Bruinooge S, Goldstein M: Future supply and demand for oncologists: challenges to assuring access to oncology services. J Oncol Prac 2007, 3:79-86.