Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Decision Support to Promote Safe Prescribing to Women of Reproductive Age: A Cluster-Randomized Trial

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND

Potentially teratogenic medications are frequently prescribed without provision of contraceptive counseling.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether computerized clinical decision support (CDS) can increase primary care providers’ (PCPs’) provision of family planning services when prescribing potentially teratogenic medications.

DESIGN

Cluster-randomized trial conducted in one academic and one community-based practice between October of 2008 and April of 2010.

PARTICIPANTS/INTERVENTIONS

Forty-one PCPs were randomized to receive one of two types of CDS which alerted them to risks of medication-induced birth defects when ordering potentially teratogenic medications for women who may become pregnant. The ‘simple’ CDS provided a cautionary alert; the ‘multifaceted’ CDS provided tailored information and links to a structured order set designed to facilitate safe prescribing. Both CDS systems alerted PCPs about medication risk only once per encounter.

MAIN MEASURES

We assessed change in documented provision of family planning services using data from 35,110 encounters and mixed-effects models. PCPs completed surveys before and after the CDS systems were implemented, allowing assessment of change in PCP-reported counseling about the risks of medication-induced birth defects and contraception.

KEY RESULTS

Both CDS systems were associated with slight increases in provision of family planning services when potential teratogens were prescribed, without a significant difference in improvement by CDS complexity (p = 0.87). Because CDS was not repeated, 13% of the times that PCPs received CDS they substituted another potential teratogen. PCPs reported significant improvements in several counseling and prescribing practices. The multifaceted group reported a greater increase in the number of times per month they discussed the risks of medication use during pregnancy (multifaceted: +4.9 ± 7.0 vs. simple: +0.8 ± 3.2, p = 0.03). The simple CDS system was associated with greater clinician satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

CDS systems hold promise for increasing provision of family planning services when fertile women are prescribed potentially teratogenic medications, but further refinement of these systems is needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schwarz EB, Maselli J, Norton M, Gonzales R. Prescription of teratogenic medications in United States ambulatory practices. Am J Med. 2005;118(11):1240–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Schwarz EB, Postlethwaite DA, Hung YY, Armstrong MA. Documentation of contraception and pregnancy when prescribing potentially teratogenic medications for reproductive-age women. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(6):370–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Santucci AK, Gold MA, Akers AY, Borrero S, Schwarz EB. Women's perspectives on counseling about risks for medication-induced birth defects. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2010;88(1):64–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Nordeng H, Koren G, Einarson A. Pregnant women's beliefs about medications–a study among 866 Norwegian women. Ann Pharmacother. 2010;44(9):1478–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Andrade SE, Gurwitz JH, Davis RL, et al. Prescription drug use in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(2):398–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lee E, Maneno MK, Smith L, et al. National patterns of medication use during pregnancy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2006;15(8):537–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sanz E, Gomez-Lopez T, Martinez-Quintas MJ. Perception of teratogenic risk of common medicines. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;95(1):127–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Pole M, Einarson A, Pairaudeau N, Einarson T, Koren G. Drug labeling and risk perceptions of teratogenicity: A survey of pregnant Canadian women and their health professionals. J Clin Pharmacol. 2000;40(6):573–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bankole A, Singh S, Haas T. Reasons why women have induced abortions: Evidence from 27 countries. International Fam Plann Perspect. 1998;24(3):117-27, 152.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Akers AY, Gold MA, Borrero S, Santucci A, Schwarz EB. Providers' perspectives on challenges to contraceptive counseling in primary care settings. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19(6):1163–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schwarz EB, Santucci A, Borrero S, Akers AY, Nikolajski C, Gold MA. Perspectives of primary care clinicians on teratogenic risk counseling. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2009;85(10):858–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Schedlbauer A, Prasad V, Mulvaney C, et al. What evidence supports the use of computerized alerts and prompts to improve clinicians' prescribing behavior? J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16(4):531–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wipfli R, Lovis C. Alerts in clinical information systems: Building frameworks and prototypes. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2010;155:163–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Raebel MA, Carroll NM, Kelleher JA, Chester EA, Berga S, Magid DJ. Randomized trial to improve prescribing safety during pregnancy. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14(4):440–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Murray DM. Design and analysis of group-randomized trials. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS. Hierarchal linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schwarz EB, Longo LS, Zhao X, Stone RA, Cunningham F, Good CB. Provision of potentially teratogenic medications to female veterans of childbearing age. Med Care. 2010;48(9):834–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hillemeier MM, Weisman CS, Chase GA, Dyer AM, Shaffer ML. Women's preconceptional health and use of health services: Implications for preconception care. Health Serv Res. 2008;43(1 Pt 1):54–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schreiber CA, Harwood BJ, Switzer GE, Creinin MD, Reeves MF, Ness RB. Training and attitudes about contraceptive management across primary care specialties: A survey of graduating residents. Contraception. 2006;73(6):618–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Spencer AL, Kern LM. Primary care program directors' perceptions of women's health education: A gap in graduate medical education persists. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2008;17(4):549–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Parisi SM, Zikovich S, Chuang CH, Sobota M, Nothnagle M, Schwarz EB. Primary care physicians’ perceptions of rates of unintended pregnancy. Contraception. Epub 2011 Dec 14 [doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.11.004].

  22. Henderson JT, Weisman CS, Grason H. Are two doctors better than one? Women's physician use and appropriate care. Womens Health Issues. 2002;12(3):138–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gilchrist VJ, Stange KC, Flocke SA, McCord G, Bourget CC. A comparison of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) measurement approach with direct observation of outpatient visits. Med Care. 2004;42:276–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lee JK, Parisi SM, Akers AY, Borrero S, Schwarz EB. The impact of contraceptive counseling in primary care on contraceptive use. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(7):731–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This investigator-initiated study was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ R18HS017093). Further support was received from NICHD K23 funds (Dr. Schwarz) and grants from the NIH and The Roadmap/NCRR/University of Pittsburgh Multidisciplinary Clinical Research Career Development Award (Dr. Handler). Many thanks to Wishwa Kapoor, MD, MPH for help with project implementation and Doug Landsittel, PhD for statistical guidance. An abstract on the physician survey data was presented at the AHRQ Health IT grantee meeting, Washington DC, June 2, 2010. An abstract on the EMR data was presented at the 1st European Congress on Preconception Care and Health, Brussels, Belgium, October 8, 2010. This work was also presented at the Epic Users’ Group Meeting, Madison, Wisconsin, September 21, 2011.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Eleanor Bimla Schwarz MD, MS, Sara M. Parisi MS, MPH, Elan D. Cohen MS & Gary S. Fischer MD

  2. Department of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Eleanor Bimla Schwarz MD, MS

  3. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Eleanor Bimla Schwarz MD, MS

  4. University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Eleanor Bimla Schwarz MD, MS, Steven M. Handler MD, PhD, Grant J. Shevchik MD & Gary S. Fischer MD

  5. Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Steven M. Handler MD, PhD

  6. Motherisk Laboratory, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    Gideon Koren MD

Authors
  1. Eleanor Bimla Schwarz MD, MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sara M. Parisi MS, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven M. Handler MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gideon Koren MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Elan D. Cohen MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Grant J. Shevchik MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gary S. Fischer MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eleanor Bimla Schwarz MD, MS.

Additional information

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00766207

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOC 171 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schwarz, E.B., Parisi, S.M., Handler, S.M. et al. Clinical Decision Support to Promote Safe Prescribing to Women of Reproductive Age: A Cluster-Randomized Trial. J GEN INTERN MED 27, 831–838 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-1991-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-1991-y

KEY WORDS

Search

Navigation