Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) are increasingly developed for hospital nursing practice, yet their impact on decision-making, workflow efficiency, and patient outcomes remains complex. This rapid review synthesizes findings from 21 studies, highlighting both the benefits and challenges of CDSS implementation focused on three key areas. CDSS can enhance nursing decision-making by reducing variability and improving standardization, but there are concerns about system usability and the tendency to override recommendations. While CDSS improve workflow efficiency by prioritizing tasks, issues such as alert fatigue and poor interoperability with hospital systems hinder their potential. Patient outcomes benefit from CDSS-driven medication safety and risk prevention, yet adherence to recommendations varies among nurses. These findings underscore the need for user-centered CDSS that align with nursing values. Future research should explore long-term effectiveness, implementation strategies and best practices for integrating CDSS into nursing workflows.
MULTIFILE
A Nursing Process-Clinical Decision Support System (NP-CDSS) Standard with 25 criteria to guide future developments of Nursing Process-Clinical Decision Support Systems was developed. The NP-CDSS Standards' content validity was established in qualitative interviews yielding fourteen categories that demonstrate international expert consensus. All experts judged the Advanced Nursing Process being the centerpiece for Nursing Process-Clinical Decision Support System that should suggest research-based, pre-defined nursing diagnoses and correct linkages between diagnoses, evidence-based interventions and patient outcomes.
LINK
ABSTRACT Purpose: Polypharmacy is a known risk factor for potentially inappropriate prescribing. Recently there is an increasing interest in clinical decision support systems (CDSS) to improve prescribing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of a CDSS, with the START-STOPP criteria as main content in the setting of a geriatric ward. Endpoints were 1) appropriateness of prescribing and 2) acceptance rate of recommendations. Methods: This prospective study comparing the use of a CDSS with usual care involved patients admitted to geriatric wards in two teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were included from January to May 2017. The medications of 64 patients in the first six weeks was assessed according to the current standard, whereas the medications of 61 patients in the second six weeks were also assessed by using a CDSS. Medication appropriateness was assessed with the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI). Results: The medications of 125 patients (median age 83 years) were reviewed. In both the usual care group and the intervention group MAI scores decreased significantly from admission to discharge (within group analyses, p<0.001). This effect was significantly larger in the intervention group (p<0.05). MAI scores at discharge in the usual care group and the intervention group were respectively 9.95±6.70 and 7.26±5.07. The CDSS generated 193 recommendations, of which 71 concerned START criteria, 45 STOPP criteria, and 77 potential interactions. Overall, 31.6% of the recommendations were accepted. Conclusion: This study shows that a CDSS to improve prescribing has additional value in the setting of a geriatric ward. Almost one third of the software-generated recommendations were interpreted as clinically relevant and accepted, on average one per patient.
MULTIFILE