Correspondence  |   September 2018
Clinical Decision Support Tools Need to Improve More Than Just Process Outcomes
Author Notes
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee (R.E.F.). Robert.e.freundlich@vanderbilt.edu
  • (Accepted for publication June 8, 2018.)
    (Accepted for publication June 8, 2018.)×
Article Information
Correspondence
Correspondence   |   September 2018
Clinical Decision Support Tools Need to Improve More Than Just Process Outcomes
Anesthesiology 9 2018, Vol.129, 614. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000002349
Anesthesiology 9 2018, Vol.129, 614. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000002349
We read with great interest the recent article by Kheterpal et al.1  We would contend that this article highlights an issue common in studies of clinical decision support—namely, that they improve process outcomes but have little demonstrable ability to improve clinically relevant outcomes.2  To date, there have been few studies correlating clinical decision support to improved patient outcomes in the perioperative literature.3,4  Given the amount of time and energy investigators devote to designing and implementing clinical decision support, this is, to be blunt, frustrating. Even more so because clinical decision support tools offer a means for using informatics expertise to implement an intervention that has significant face validity. That is, they offer providers timely and relevant information that highlights opportunities for making clinical interventions that they otherwise may have failed to recognize, thereby improving outcomes.