Duke University Medical Center
Durham, North Carolina, 27710, United States
NCT Number: NCT00365885
The purpose of this study is to determine the value of shared health information on care quality and costs when this information is used to notify care providers about concerning health events for patients cared for by a community-based network of providers.
Looking for future studies?
Notify MeAll sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Durham, North Carolina, 27710, United States
Project Abstract This three-year project will assess the costs and benefits of health information technology (HIT) in an established community-wide network of academic, private and public healthcare facilities created to share clinical information for the purpose of population-based care management of over 16,000 Medicaid beneficiaries in Durham County, North Carolina. The area of interest for this project is the impact of information-driven interventions on care quality, patient safety and healthcare costs across the diverse stakeholders participating in this collaborative partnership. In order to asses HIT value rigorously in the context of a production information system that is under continual development, we propose to conduct a randomized controlled trial. Specifically, we will randomly assign patients by family unit to either a control group or to an intervention group in which they will initially receive one of 3 information-driven interventions. The interventions include clinical alerts sent to care providers, performance feedback reports presented to clinic managers, and care reminders sent directly to patients. The content of the interventions will address "concerning" events (e.g., an emergency room encounter for asthma) and care deficiencies (e.g., delinquency on biannual mammogram) identified from the composite set of clinical data in our information system. To assess the benefits and burdens of the interventions, combinations of the 3 interventions will be sequentially introduced into the study groups over the course of the project. The analysis will compare groups receiving various combinations of interventions as well as those receiving no interventions. At baseline and at six-month intervals throughout the course of the study, we will measure emergency department encounter rates, hospitalization rates, HEDIS (Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set) scores, missed appointment rates, glycated hemoglobin levels in diabetics, and patient satisfaction. Our assessment will look at the societal value of HIT as well as the value for individual stakeholders including patients, providers, payers, purchasers and policy makers. From these measures, we will assess the costs and benefits of this community-wide effort to promote interoperability of clinical data exchange in order to increase the understanding of HIT value in a community setting. In our preliminary studies, we have observed a statistically significant 3-fold reduction in repeat ED (Emergency Department) encounter rates using email alerts alone. The approach used in this project is able to be generalized across geographic areas and healthcare settings and can, therefore, serve to promote the dissemination of HIT to other communities.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
-
computer decision support system that generates notifications about sentinel health events and communicates this information via electronic mail to care managers, feedback reports to clinical managers, and letters to patients
Other names: Decision support engine is called SEBASTIAN
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 6 to 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 3 to 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 6 to 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 3 to 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: At conclusion of study
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Time frame: at 9 months after the intervention has been introduced and then at 6-month intervals as the intervention is sequentially enhanced.
Duke University
Other
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07549126
Chemically-Induced Disorders, Clinical Decision Support
Guilford, Connecticut, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07708155
Clinical Decision Support, Clinical Decision-making
Seoul, South Korea
View Trial DetailsNCT07597499
Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Care, Clinical Decision Support
San Francisco, California, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06793696
Chemically-Induced Disorders, Clinical Decision Support
Guilford, Connecticut, United States
View Trial Details