16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of a Computer-Based Decision Support Intervention on Autism Spectrum Disorder Screening in Pediatric Primary Care Clinics : A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

      research-article
      , MD, MS 1 , 2 , , , MD, MPH 3 , , PhD 4 , , MS 4 , , MD, MS 2 , 5
      JAMA Network Open
      American Medical Association

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          Can computer automation coupled with decision support increase timely screening for autism spectrum disorders in primary care practice?

          Findings

          This cluster randomized clinical trial found that computer-based screening and decision support embedded into the routine workflow in primary care increased rates of screening from 0% to 100%, but physicians responded to approximately half of positive screening results.

          Meaning

          Automating the screening process can ensure that screening takes place, but follow-through of the results is vulnerable to human error.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Universal early screening for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is recommended but not routinely performed.

          Objective

          To determine whether computer-automated screening and clinical decision support can improve ASD screening rates in pediatric primary care practices.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This cluster randomized clinical trial, conducted between November 16, 2010, and November 21, 2012, compared ASD screening rates among a random sample of 274 children aged 18 to 24 months in urban pediatric clinics of an inner-city county hospital system with or without an ASD screening module built into an existing decision support software system. Statistical analyses were conducted from February 6, 2017, to June 1, 2018.

          Interventions

          Four clinics were matched in pairs based on patient volume and race/ethnicity, then randomized within pairs. Decision support with the Child Health Improvement Through Computer Automation system (CHICA) was integrated with workflow and with the electronic health record in intervention clinics.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          The main outcome was screening rates among children aged 18 to 24 months. Because the intervention was discontinued among children aged 18 months at the request of the participating clinics, only results for those aged 24 months were collected and analyzed. Rates of positive screening results, clinicians’ response rates to screening results in the computer system, and new cases of ASD identified were also measured. Main results were controlled for race/ethnicity and intracluster correlation.

          Results

          Two clinics were randomized to receive the intervention, and 2 served as controls. Records from 274 children (101 girls, 162 boys, and 11 missing information on sex; age range, 23-30 months) were reviewed (138 in the intervention clinics and 136 in the control clinics). Of 263 children, 242 (92.0%) were enrolled in Medicaid, 138 (52.5%) were African American, and 96 (36.5%) were Hispanic. Screening rates in the intervention clinics increased from 0% (95% CI, 0%-5.5%) at baseline to 68.4% (13 of 19) (95% CI, 43.4%-87.4%) in 6 months and to 100% (18 of 18) (95% CI, 81.5%-100%) in 24 months. Control clinics had no significant increase in screening rates (baseline, 7 of 64 children [10.9%]; 6-24 months after the intervention, 11 of 72 children [15.3%]; P = .46). Screening results were positive for 265 of 980 children (27.0%) screened by CHICA during the study period. Among the 265 patients with positive screening results, physicians indicated any response in CHICA in 151 (57.0%). Two children in the intervention group received a new diagnosis of ASD within the time frame of the study.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          The findings suggest that computer automation, when integrated with clinical workflow and the electronic health record, increases screening of children for ASD, but follow-up by physicians is still flawed. Automation of the subsequent workup is still needed.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01612897

          Abstract

          This randomized clinical trial examines whether computer-automated screening and clinical decision support can improve autism spectrum disorder screening rates in a pediatric primary care practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review.

          Developers of health care software have attributed improvements in patient care to these applications. As with any health care intervention, such claims require confirmation in clinical trials. To review controlled trials assessing the effects of computerized clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and to identify study characteristics predicting benefit. We updated our earlier reviews by searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Inspec, and ISI databases and consulting reference lists through September 2004. Authors of 64 primary studies confirmed data or provided additional information. We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials that evaluated the effect of a CDSS compared with care provided without a CDSS on practitioner performance or patient outcomes. Teams of 2 reviewers independently abstracted data on methods, setting, CDSS and patient characteristics, and outcomes. One hundred studies met our inclusion criteria. The number and methodologic quality of studies improved over time. The CDSS improved practitioner performance in 62 (64%) of the 97 studies assessing this outcome, including 4 (40%) of 10 diagnostic systems, 16 (76%) of 21 reminder systems, 23 (62%) of 37 disease management systems, and 19 (66%) of 29 drug-dosing or prescribing systems. Fifty-two trials assessed 1 or more patient outcomes, of which 7 trials (13%) reported improvements. Improved practitioner performance was associated with CDSSs that automatically prompted users compared with requiring users to activate the system (success in 73% of trials vs 47%; P = .02) and studies in which the authors also developed the CDSS software compared with studies in which the authors were not the developers (74% success vs 28%; respectively, P = .001). Many CDSSs improve practitioner performance. To date, the effects on patient outcomes remain understudied and, when studied, inconsistent.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Identification and evaluation of children with autism spectrum disorders.

            Autism spectrum disorders are not rare; many primary care pediatricians care for several children with autism spectrum disorders. Pediatricians play an important role in early recognition of autism spectrum disorders, because they usually are the first point of contact for parents. Parents are now much more aware of the early signs of autism spectrum disorders because of frequent coverage in the media; if their child demonstrates any of the published signs, they will most likely raise their concerns to their child's pediatrician. It is important that pediatricians be able to recognize the signs and symptoms of autism spectrum disorders and have a strategy for assessing them systematically. Pediatricians also must be aware of local resources that can assist in making a definitive diagnosis of, and in managing, autism spectrum disorders. The pediatrician must be familiar with developmental, educational, and community resources as well as medical subspecialty clinics. This clinical report is 1 of 2 documents that replace the original American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement and technical report published in 2001. This report addresses background information, including definition, history, epidemiology, diagnostic criteria, early signs, neuropathologic aspects, and etiologic possibilities in autism spectrum disorders. In addition, this report provides an algorithm to help the pediatrician develop a strategy for early identification of children with autism spectrum disorders. The accompanying clinical report addresses the management of children with autism spectrum disorders and follows this report on page 1162 [available at www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/120/5/1162]. Both clinical reports are complemented by the toolkit titled "Autism: Caring for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Resource Toolkit for Clinicians," which contains screening and surveillance tools, practical forms, tables, and parent handouts to assist the pediatrician in the identification, evaluation, and management of autism spectrum disorders in children.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Validation of the modified checklist for Autism in toddlers, revised with follow-up (M-CHAT-R/F).

              This study validates the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised with Follow-up (M-CHAT-R/F), a screening tool for low-risk toddlers, and demonstrates improved utility compared with the original M-CHAT. Toddlers (N = 16,071) were screened during 18- and 24-month well-child care visits in metropolitan Atlanta and Connecticut. Parents of toddlers at risk on M-CHAT-R completed follow-up; those who continued to show risk were evaluated. The reliability and validity of the M-CHAT-R/F were demonstrated, and optimal scoring was determined by using receiver operating characteristic curves. Children whose total score was ≥ 3 initially and ≥ 2 after follow-up had a 47.5% risk of being diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD; confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.41-0.54) and a 94.6% risk of any developmental delay or concern (95% CI: 0.92-0.98). Total score was more effective than alternative scores. An algorithm based on 3 risk levels is recommended to maximize clinical utility and to reduce age of diagnosis and onset of early intervention. The M-CHAT-R detects ASD at a higher rate compared with the M-CHAT while also reducing the number of children needing the follow-up. Children in the current study were diagnosed 2 years younger than the national median age of diagnosis. The M-CHAT-R/F detects many cases of ASD in toddlers; physicians using the 2-stage screener can be confident that most screen-positive cases warrant evaluation and referral for early intervention. Widespread implementation of universal screening can lower the age of ASD diagnosis by 2 years compared with recent surveillance findings, increasing time available for early intervention.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                18 December 2019
                December 2019
                18 December 2019
                : 2
                : 12
                : e1917676
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Children’s Health Services Research, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
                [2 ]Regenstrief Institute Inc, Indianapolis, Indiana
                [3 ]Axon Health Associates LLC, Indianapolis, Indiana
                [4 ]Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
                [5 ]Division of Pediatric and Adolescent Comparative Effectiveness Research, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: October 28, 2019.
                Published: December 18, 2019. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.17676
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2019 Downs SM et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Stephen M. Downs, MD, MS, Division of Children’s Health Services Research, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, 410 W 10th St, HS2000, Indianapolis, IN 46202 ( stmdowns@ 123456iu.edu ).
                Author Contributions: Dr Downs had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Downs, Bauer, Saha, Carroll.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Downs, Saha, Ofner, Carroll.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Downs.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Bauer, Saha, Ofner, Carroll.
                Statistical analysis: Saha, Ofner.
                Obtained funding: Downs, Carroll.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Downs.
                Supervision: Downs.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Downs reported being a cocreator of the Child Health Improvement Through Computer Automation (CHICA) system; being the founder and CEO of Digital Health Solutions, a company created to license the CHICA software (this study was completed prior to the formation of the company); and receiving grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality during the conduct of the study. Dr Saha reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health during the conduct of the study. Dr Carroll reported being a cocreator of the CHICA system; and receiving grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: This study was funded by grant R01HS018453 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funding source had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 2.
                Additional Contributions: We acknowledge the technical expertise and efforts of the individual members of the Child Health Informatics and Research Development Lab (CHIRDL), which provides programming and technical support for the Child Health Improvement Through Computer Automation (CHICA) system, the Pediatric Research Network (PResNet) at Indiana University for medical record reviews and data management, and the clinic personnel who constantly help us evaluate and improve CHICA.
                Additional Information: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov at the time that the computer-based intervention was initiated and medical record abstraction was begun. To assess baseline outcomes (screening vs no screening), data were obtained retrospectively from the medical record. In addition, medical record abstractors had to review visits in the record prior to the index visit to determine if the participant was eligible for screening (ie, had not been screened previously). As a result, retrospectively collected data are reported from visits prior to the trial being registered in ClinicalTrials.gov.
                Article
                zoi190671
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.17676
                6991212
                31851348
                3f2bff48-336d-40c7-9c3a-b61df7effc45
                Copyright 2019 Downs SM et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 16 August 2019
                : 28 October 2019
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Health Informatics

                Comments

                Comment on this article