Impact analysis studies of clinical prediction rules relevant to primary care: A systematic review

BMJ Open

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2016, Pages

  Wallace, Emma ^a   Uijen, Maike J M ^a,b   Clyne, Barbara ^a   Zarabzadeh, Atieh ^a   Keogh, Claire ^a   Galvin, Rose ^a,c   Smith, Susan M ^a   Fahey, Tom ^a  

^a ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS IN IRELAND   (Ireland)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; LIPID;

ANALYSIS; ANKLE INJURY; ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CLINICAL PREDICTION RULE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HUMAN; IMPACT ANALYSIS; KNEE INJURY; LIPID BLOOD LEVEL; MUSCULOSKELETAL INJURY; NECK INJURY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT REFERRAL; PHYSICIAN; PREDICTION; PRESCRIPTION; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SORE THROAT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; THORAX PAIN; TIME SERIES ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; EPIDEMIOLOGY; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; RISK FACTOR; STANDARDS;

DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; INTERRUPTED TIME SERIES ANALYSIS; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84962522193     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009957     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC, et al. Users' guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 2000;284:79-84.
2. Keogh C, Wallace E, O'Brien KK, et al. Developing an international register of clinical prediction rules for use in primary care: a descriptive analysis. Ann Fam Med 2014;12:359-66.
3. Wasson JH, Sox HC, Neff RK, et al. Clinical prediction rules. Applications and methodological standards. N Engl J Med 1985;313:793-9.
4. Laupacis A, Sekar N, Stiell IG. Clinical prediction rules. A review and suggested modifications of methodological standards. JAMA 1997;277:488-94.
5. Reilly BM, Evans AT. Translating clinical research into clinical practice: impact of using prediction rules to make decisions. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:201-9.
6. Toll DB, Janssen KJ, Vergouwe Y, et al. Validation, updating and impact of clinical prediction rules: a review. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:1085-94.
7. Wallace E, Smith SM, Perera-Salazar R, et al. Framework for the impact analysis and implementation of Clinical Prediction Rules (CPRs). BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2011;11:62.
8. Moons KG, Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, et al. Prognosis and prognostic research: application and impact of prognostic models in clinical practice. BMJ 2009;338:b606.
9. Keogh C, Wallace E, O'Brien KK, et al. Optimized retrieval of primary care clinical prediction rules from MEDLINE to establish a Web-based register. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:848-60.
10. Ebell MH. Evidence-based diagnosis: a handbook of clinical prediction rules. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2001.
11. Allen J, Gay BG, Crebolder H, et al. The European Definition of General Practice/Family Medicine. Short version. WONCA Europe, 2011. http://www.unige.ch/medecine/umpr/Enseignement/stage3 ememaster/Definition-wonca-tree.pdf (accessed 18 Mar 2014).
12. WONCA International Classification Committee. The international classification of primary care. 2nd edn. http://www.kith.no/upload/ 2705/icpc-2-english.pdf (accessed: 22 Mar 2014).
13. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928.
14. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0. March, 2011. http://handbook.cochrane.org/
15. Auleley GR, Ravaud P, Giraudeau B, et al. Implementation of the Ottawa ankle rules in France. A multicenter randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1997;277:1935-9.
16. Stiell IG, McKnight RD, Greenberg GH, et al. Implementation of the Ottawa ankle rules. JAMA 1994;271:827-32.
17. Stiell IG, Wells GA, Hoag RH, et al. Implementation of the Ottawa Knee Rule for the use of radiography in acute knee injuries. JAMA 1997;278:2075-9.
18. Stiell IG, Clement CM, Grimshaw J, et al. Implementation of the Canadian C-Spine Rule: prospective 12 centre cluster randomised trial. BMJ 2009;339:b4146.
19. Cameron C, Naylor CD. No impact from active dissemination of the Ottawa Ankle Rules: further evidence of the need for local implementation of practice guidelines. CMAJ 1999;160:1165-8.
20. Boutis K, Grootendorst P, Willan A, et al. Effect of the Low Risk Ankle Rule on the frequency of radiography in children with ankle injuries. CMAJ 2013;185:E731-8.
21. Pozen MW, D'Agostino RB, Selker HP, et al. A predictive instrument to improve coronary-care-unit admission practices in acute ischemic heart disease. A prospective multicenter clinical trial. N Engl J Med 1984;310:1273-8.
22. Kline JA, Zeitouni RA, Hernandez-Nino J, et al. Randomized trial of computerized quantitative pretest probability in low-risk chest pain patients: effect on safety and resource use. Ann Emerg Med 2009;53:727-35.e1.
23. Hall LM, Jung RT, Leese GP. Controlled trial of effect of documented cardiovascular risk scores on prescribing. BMJ 2003;326:251-2.
24. Hanon O, Franconi G, Mourad JJ, et al. [The estimation of cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients is not modified by management of the hypertension]. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 2000;93:943-7.
25. Grover SA, Lowensteyn I, Joseph L, et al. Discussing coronary risk with patients to improve blood pressure treatment: secondary results from the CHECK-UP study. J Gen Intern Med 2009;24:33-9.
26. Grover SA, Lowensteyn I, Joseph L, et al. Patient knowledge of coronary risk profile improves the effectiveness of dyslipidemia therapy: the CHECK-UP study: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 2007;167:2296-303.
27. Persell SD, Lloyd-Jones DM, Friesema EM, et al. Electronic health record-based patient identification and individualized mailed outreach for primary cardiovascular disease prevention: a cluster randomized trial. J Gen Intern Med 2013;28:554-60.
28. McIsaac WJ, Goel V. Effect of an explicit decision-support tool on decisions to prescribe antibiotics for sore throat. Med Decis Making 1998;18:220-8.
29. McIsaac WJ, Goel V, To T, et al. Effect on antibiotic prescribing of repeated clinical prompts to use a sore throat score: lessons from a failed community intervention study. J Fam Pract 2002;51:339-44.
30. Worrall G, Hutchinson J, Sherman G, et al. Diagnosing streptococcal sore throat in adults: randomized controlled trial of in-office aids. Can Fam Physician 2007;53:666-71.
31. Little P, Hobbs FD, Moore M, et al. Clinical score and rapid antigen detection test to guide antibiotic use for sore throats: randomised controlled trial of PRISM (primary care streptococcal management). BMJ 2013;347:f5806.
32. McGinn TG, McCullagh L, Kannry J, et al. Efficacy of an evidence-based clinical decision support in primary care practices: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:1584-91.
33. Stiell IG, Clement CM, Grimshaw JM, et al. A prospective cluster-randomized trial to implement the Canadian CT Head Rule in emergency departments. CMAJ 2010;182:1527-32.
34. McIsaac WJ, White D, Tannenbaum D, et al. A clinical score to reduce unnecessary antibiotic use in patients with sore throat. CMAJ 1998;158:75-83.
35. Stiell I, Wells G, Laupacis A, et al. Multicentre trial to introduce the Ottawa ankle rules for use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Multicentre Ankle Rule Study Group. BMJ 1995;311:594-7.
36. Bessen T, Clark R, Shakib S, et al. A multifaceted strategy for implementation of the Ottawa ankle rules in two emergency departments. BMJ 2009;339:b3056.
37. Kerr D, Bradshaw L, Kelly AM. Implementation of the Canadian C-spine rule reduces cervical spine x-ray rate for alert patients with potential neck injury. J Emerg Med 2005;28:127-31.
38. Stanley AJ, Ashley D, Dalton HR, et al. Outpatient management of patients with low-risk upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage: multicentre validation and prospective evaluation. Lancet 2009;373:42-7.
39. Sultan HY, Boyle A, Pereira M, et al. Application of the Canadian CT head rules in managing minor head injuries in a UK emergency department: implications for the implementation of the NICE guidelines. Emerg Med J 2004;21:420-5.
40. Karlin-Zysman C, Zeitoun N, Belletti L, et al. Struggling to bring clinical prediction rules to the point of care: missed opportunities to impact patient care. J Comp Eff Res 2012;1:421-9.
41. Maguire JL, Kulik DM, Laupacis A, et al. Clinical prediction rules for children: a systematic review. Pediatrics 2011;128:e666-77.
42. Moons KG, de Groot JA, Bouwmeester W, et al. Critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies: the CHARMS checklist. PLoS Med 2014;11: e1001744.
43. Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, et al. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2015;68: 134-43.
44. Pluddemann A, Wallace E, Bankhead C, et al. Clinical prediction rules in practice: review of clinical guidelines and survey of GPs. Br J Gen Pract 2014;64:e233-42.
45. O'Rourke N. Review of Referral Patterns and Triage Processes in Symptomatic Breast Units. A hospital perspective. Dublin: National Cancer Control Programme; 2012.
46. Galvin R, Joyce D, Downey E, et al. Development and validation of a clinical prediction rule to identify suspected breast cancer: a prospective cohort study. BMC cancer 2014;14:743.
47. Framingham Heart Study. 2014. https://www.framinghamheartstudy. org/risk-functions/coronary-heart-disease/10-year-risk.php (accessed 15 Jun 2015).
48. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Robson J, et al. Derivation, validation, and evaluation of a new QRISK model to estimate lifetime risk of cardiovascular disease: cohort study using QResearch database. BMJ 2010;341:c6624.