Da. Fitzmaurice et al., EVALUATION OF COMPUTERIZED DECISION-SUPPORT FOR ORAL ANTICOAGULATION MANAGEMENT BASED IN PRIMARY-CARE, British journal of general practice, 46(410), 1996, pp. 533-535
Background. Increasing indications for oral anticoagulation has led to
pressure on general practices to undertake therapeutic monitoring. Co
mputerized decision support (DSS) has been shown to be effective in ho
spitals for improving clinical management. Its usefulness in primary c
are has previously not been investigated. Aim. To test the effectivene
ss of using DSS for oral anticoagulation monitoring in primary care by
measuring the proportions of patients adequately controlled, defined
as within the appropriate therapeutic range of International Normalise
d Ratio (INR). Method. All patients receiving warfarin from two Birmin
gham inner city general practices were invited to attend a practice-ba
sed anticoagulation clinic. In practice A all patients were managed us
ing DSS. In practice B patients were randomized to receive dosing advi
ce either through DSS or through the local hospital laboratory. Clinic
al outcomes, adverse events and patient acceptability were recorded. R
esults. Forty-nine patients were seen in total. There were significant
improvements in INR control from 23% to 86% (P>0.001) in the practice
where all patients received dosing through DSS. In the practice where
patients were randomized to either DSS or hospital dosing, logistic r
egression showed a significant trend for improvement in intervention p
atients which was not apparent in the hospital-dosed patients (P<0.001
). Mean recall times were significantly extended in patients who were
dosed by the practice DSS through the full 72 months (24 days to 36 da
ys) (P = 0.033). Adverse events were comparable between hospital and p
ractice-dosed patients, although a number of esoteric events occurred.
Patient satisfaction with the practice clinics was high. Conclusion.
Computerized DSS enables the safe and effective transfer of anticoagul
ation management from hospital to primary care and may result in impro
ved patient outcome in terms of the level of control, frequency of rev
iew and general acceptability.