Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research article

Utilizing a user-centered approach to develop and assess pharmacogenomic clinical decision support for thiopurine methyltransferase

Authors: Khoa A. Nguyen, Himalaya Patel, David A. Haggstrom, Alan J. Zillich, Thomas F. Imperiale, Alissa L. Russ

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

A pharmacogenomic clinical decision support tool (PGx-CDS) for thiopurine medications can help physicians incorporate pharmacogenomic results into prescribing decisions by providing up-to-date, real-time decision support. However, the PGx-CDS user interface may introduce errors and promote alert fatigue. The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate a prototype of a PGx-CDS user interface for thiopurine medications with user-centered design methods.

Methods

This study had two phases: In phase I, we conducted qualitative interviews to assess providers’ information needs. Interview transcripts were analyzed through a combination of inductive and deductive qualitative analysis to develop design requirements for a PGx-CDS user interface. Using these requirements, we developed a user interface prototype and evaluated its usability (phase II).

Results

In total, 14 providers participated: 10 were interviewed in phase I, and seven providers completed usability testing in phase II (3 providers participated in both phases). Most (90%) participants were interested in PGx-CDS systems to help improve medication efficacy and patient safety. Interviews yielded 11 themes sorted into two main categories: 1) health care providers’ views on PGx-CDS and 2) important design features for PGx-CDS. We organized these findings into guidance for PGx-CDS content and display. Usability testing of the PGx-CDS prototype showed high provider satisfaction.

Conclusion

This is one of the first studies to utilize a user-centered design approach to develop and assess a PGx-CDS interface prototype for Thiopurine Methyltransferase (TPMT). This study provides guidance for the development of a PGx-CDS, and particularly for biomarkers such as TPMT.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
Johnson JA. Pharmacogenetics: potential for individualized drug therapy through genetics. Trends Genet. 2003;19(11):660–6.PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
5.
Liu YP, et al. Association between thiopurine S-methyltransferase polymorphisms and thiopurine-induced adverse drug reactions in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0121745.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
6.
Liu YP, et al. Association between thiopurine S-methyltransferase polymorphisms and azathioprine-induced adverse drug reactions in patients with autoimmune diseases: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10(12):e0144234.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
El-Rashedy FH, et al. Clinical implication of thiopurine methyltransferase polymorphism in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a preliminary Egyptian study. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol. 2015;36(4):265–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
Weinshilboum RM, Sladek SL. Mercaptopurine pharmacogenetics: monogenic inheritance of erythrocyte thiopurine methyltransferase activity. Am J Hum Genet. 1980;32(5):651–62.PubMedPubMedCentral
9.
10.
Bell GC, et al. Development and use of active clinical decision support for preemptive pharmacogenomics. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(e1):e93–9.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Sanderson JD. TPMT testing before starting azathioprine or mercaptopurine: surely just do it? Gastroenterology. 2015;149(4):850–3.PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Johnson JA, et al. Institutional profile: University of Florida and Shands Hospital personalized medicine program: clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics. Pharmacogenomics. 2013;14(7):723–6.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Shuldiner AR, et al. Implementation of pharmacogenetics: the University of Maryland personalized anti-platelet pharmacogenetics program. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2014;166C(1):76–84.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Devine EB, et al. Usability evaluation of pharmacogenomics clinical decision support aids and clinical knowledge resources in a computerized provider order entry system: a mixed methods approach. Int J Med Inform. 2014;83(7):473–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
16.
Hinderer M, et al. Integrating clinical decision support systems for pharmacogenomic testing into clinical routine - a scoping review of designs of user-system interactions in recent system development. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017;17(1):81.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
Kawamoto K, et al. A national clinical decision support infrastructure to enable the widespread and consistent practice of genomic and personalized medicine. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2009;9:17.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
Horsky J, et al. Design of decision support interventions for medication prescribing. Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(6):492–503.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Russ AL, et al. Design and implementation of a hospital-based usability laboratory: insights from a Department of Veterans Affairs laboratory for health information technology. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2012;38(12):531–40.PubMedCrossRef
20.
21.
Swain J. A hybrid approach to thematic analysis in qualitative research: using a practical example. London: SAGE Research Methods Cases; 2018.
22.
Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers; 2016.
23.
Welch BM, Kawamoto K. The need for clinical decision support integrated with the electronic health record for the clinical application of whole genome sequencing information. J Pers Med. 2013;3(4):306–25.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
Johansen Taber KA, Dickinson BD. Pharmacogenomic knowledge gaps and educational resource needs among physicians in selected specialties. Pharmgenomics Pers Med. 2014;7:145–62.PubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Bates DW, et al. Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2003;10(6):523–30.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
Wickens CD, et al. Introduction to human factors engineering. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.; 2003.
27.
28.
Phansalkar S, et al. A review of human factors principles for the design and implementation of medication safety alerts in clinical information systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010;17(5):493–501.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Wogalter MS, Kalsher MJ, Rashid R. Effect of signal word and source attribution on judgments of warning credibility and compliance likelihood. Int J Ind Ergon. 1999;24(2):185–92.CrossRef
30.
Smith-Jackson TL. Warnings and risk communication by Michael S. Wogalter, David M. DeJoy, & Kenneth R. Laughery 1999, 365 pages, $109.95, vol. 10(1). Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis ISBN 0-7484-0266-7; 2002. p. 29.
31.
Sanders MS, McCormick EJ. Human factors in engineering and design, vol. xiii. 7th ed. New York: Mcgraw-Hill Book Company; 1993. p. 790.
32.
Marino CJ, Mahan RR. Configural displays can improve nutrition-related. decisions: an application of the proximity compatibility principle. Hum Factors. 2005;47(1):121–30.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Zhang J, et al. Using usability heuristics to evaluate patient safety of medical devices. J Biomed Inform. 2003;36(1–2):23–30.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Saleem JJ, et al. Impact of clinical reminder redesign on learnability, efficiency, usability, and workload for ambulatory clinic nurses. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14(5):632–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
35.
Russ AL, et al. Applying human factors principles to alert design increases efficiency and reduces prescribing errors in a scenario-based simulation. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(e2):e287–96.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
36.
Story MF, et al. The universal design file : designing for people of all ages and abilities. Raleigh; Washington, DC: School of Design, the Center for Universal Design, NC State University; U.S. Dept. of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center; 1998.
37.
Russ AL, et al. Prescribers’ interactions with medication alerts at the point of prescribing: a multi-method, in situ investigation of the human-computer interaction. Int J Med Inform. 2012;81(4):232–43.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Jaspers MW. A comparison of usability methods for testing interactive health technologies: methodological aspects and empirical evidence. Int J Med Inform. 2009;78(5):340–53.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Lewis JR. IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. Int J Hum-Comput Interact. 1995;7:57–78.CrossRef
40.
Harris PA, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Russ AL, et al. Usability evaluation of a medication reconciliation tool: embedding safety probes to assess users’ detection of medication discrepancies. J Biomed Inform. 2018;82:178–86.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Melton BL, et al. Iterative development and evaluation of a pharmacogenomic-guided clinical decision support system for warfarin dosing. Appl Clin Inform. 2016;7(4):1088–106.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
43.
Khelifi M, et al. Design recommendations for pharmacogenomics clinical decision support systems. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc. 2017;2017:237–46.PubMedPubMedCentral
44.
45.
Melnick ER, et al. Patient-centered decision support: formative usability evaluation of integrated clinical decision support with a patient decision aid for minor head injury in the emergency department. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(5):e174.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
46.
Shneiderman B, et al. Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction. New Jersey: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 2009. p. 624.
47.
Jacko JA. Human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies, and emerging applications. 3rd ed. New Jersey: CRC Press, Inc.; 2012. p. 1518.
48.
49.
Nielsen J. Usability engineering. New Jersey: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.; 1993. p. 358.
Metadata
Title
Utilizing a user-centered approach to develop and assess pharmacogenomic clinical decision support for thiopurine methyltransferase
Authors
Khoa A. Nguyen
Himalaya Patel
David A. Haggstrom
Alan J. Zillich
Thomas F. Imperiale
Alissa L. Russ
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-019-0919-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2019 Go to the issue

Technical advance

ThalPred: a web-based prediction tool for discriminating thalassemia trait and iron deficiency anemia

Research article

Selection process for botulinum toxin injections in patients with chronic-stage hemiplegic stroke: a qualitative study

Research article

Ultra-short term HRV features as surrogates of short term HRV: a case study on mental stress detection in real life

Research article

A validated natural language processing algorithm for brain imaging phenotypes from radiology reports in UK electronic health records

Research article

Shared decision making when patients consider surgery for lumbar herniated disc: development and test of a patient decision aid

Research article

Staff expectations for the implementation of an electronic health record system: a qualitative study using normalisation process theory