Top

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Musculoskeletal Pain | Research

Acceptance and use of a clinical decision support system in musculoskeletal pain disorders – the SupportPrim project

Authors: Fredrik Granviken, Ingebrigt Meisingset, Ottar Vasseljen, Kerstin Bach, Anita Formo Bones, Nina Elisabeth Klevanger

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Background

We have developed a clinical decision support system (CDSS) based on methods from artificial intelligence to support physiotherapists and patients in the decision-making process of managing musculoskeletal (MSK) pain disorders in primary care. The CDSS finds the most similar successful patients from the past to give treatment recommendations for a new patient. Using previous similar patients with successful outcomes to advise treatment moves management of MSK pain patients from one-size fits all recommendations to more individually tailored treatment. This study aimed to summarise the development and explore the acceptance and use of the CDSS for MSK pain patients.

Methods

This qualitative study was carried out in the Norwegian physiotherapy primary healthcare sector between October and November 2020, ahead of a randomised controlled trial. We included four physiotherapists and three of their patients, in total 12 patients, with musculoskeletal pain in the neck, shoulder, back, hip, knee or complex pain. We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with all participants. The interviews were analysed using the Framework Method.

Results

Overall, both the physiotherapists and patients found the system acceptable and usable. Important findings from the analysis of the interviews were that the CDSS was valued as a preparatory and exploratory tool, facilitating the therapeutic relationship. However, the physiotherapists used the system mainly to support their previous and current practice rather than involving patients to a greater extent in decisions and learning from previous successful patients.

Conclusions

The CDSS was acceptable and usable to both the patients and physiotherapists. However, the system appeared not to considerably influence the physiotherapists' clinical reasoning and choice of treatment based on information from most similar successful patients. This could be due to a smaller than optimal number of previous patients in the CDSS or insufficient clinical implementation. Extensive training of physiotherapists should not be underestimated to build understanding and trust in CDSSs.

Available only for authorised users

James SL, Abate D, Abate KH, Abay SM, Abbafati C, Abbasi N, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet. 2018;392(10159):1789–858. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32279-7.CrossRef

Foster NE, Anema JR, Cherkin D, Chou R, Cohen SP, Gross DP, et al. Prevention and treatment of low back pain: evidence, challenges, and promising directions. Lancet. 2018;391(10137):2368–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30489-6.CrossRefPubMed

O’Keeffe M, Purtill H, Kennedy N, Conneely M, Hurley J, O’Sullivan P, et al. Comparative Effectiveness of Conservative Interventions for Nonspecific Chronic Spinal Pain: Physical, Behavioral/Psychologically Informed, or Combined? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Pain. 2016;17(7):755–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2016.01.473.CrossRefPubMed

Zadro J, O’Keeffe M, Maher C. Do physical therapists follow evidence-based guidelines when managing musculoskeletal conditions? Systematic review. BMJ Open. 2019;9(10): e032329. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032329.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lin I, Wiles L, Waller R, Goucke R, Nagree Y, Gibberd M, et al. What does best practice care for musculoskeletal pain look like? Eleven consistent recommendations from high-quality clinical practice guidelines: systematic review. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2019:bjsports-2018–099878. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-099878

Croft P, Altman DG, Deeks JJ, Dunn KM, Hay AD, Hemingway H, et al. The science of clinical practice: disease diagnosis or patient prognosis? Evidence about “what is likely to happen” should shape clinical practice. BMC Med. 2015;13:20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-014-0265-4.

Wasylewicz A, Scheepers-Hoeks A. Clinical decision support systems. Fundamentals of clinical data science. 2019. p. 153–69.CrossRef

Haynes RB, Wilczynski NL, the Computerized Clinical Decision Support System Systematic Review T. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: Methods of a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review. Implementation Science. 2010;5(1):12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-12

Sim I, Gorman P, Greenes RA, Haynes RB, Kaplan B, Lehmann H, et al. Clinical Decision Support Systems for the Practice of Evidence-based Medicine. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8(6):527–34. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2001.0080527.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Varghese J, Kleine M, Gessner SI, Sandmann S, Dugas M. Effects of computerized decision support system implementations on patient outcomes in inpatient care: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(5):593–602. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocx100.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Moja L, Kwag KH, Lytras T, Bertizzolo L, Brandt L, Pecoraro V, et al. Effectiveness of Computerized Decision Support Systems Linked to Electronic Health Records: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(12):e12–22. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2014.302164.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Garg AX, Adhikari NKJ, McDonald H, Rosas-Arellano MP, Devereaux PJ, Beyene J, et al. Effects of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems on Practitioner Performance and Patient OutcomesA Systematic Review. JAMA. 2005;293(10):1223–38. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.10.1223.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF. Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ. 2005;330(7494):765. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38398.500764.8F.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Mebrahtu TF, Skyrme S, Randell R, Keenan A-M, Bloor K, Yang H, et al. Effects of computerised clinical decision support systems (CDSS) on nursing and allied health professional performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review of experimental and observational studies. BMJ Open. 2021;11(12): e053886. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053886.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Bright TJ, Wong A, Dhurjati R, Bristow E, Bastian L, Coeytaux RR, et al. Effect of Clinical Decision-Support Systems. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(1):29–43. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-157-1-201207030-00450.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Zhao Y, Zheng X, Wang J, Xu D, Li S, Lv J, et al. Effect of clinical decision support systems on clinical outcome for acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Nephrol. 2021;22(1):271. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-021-02459-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Taheri Moghadam S, Sadoughi F, Velayati F, Ehsanzadeh SJ, Poursharif S. The effects of clinical decision support system for prescribing medication on patient outcomes and physician practice performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021;21(1):98. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01376-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Chen W, Howard K, Gorham G, O’Bryan CM, Coffey P, Balasubramanya B, et al. Design, effectiveness, and economic outcomes of contemporary chronic disease clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022;29(10):1757–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocac110.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Xie CX, Chen Q, Hincapié CA, Hofstetter L, Maher CG, Machado GC. Effectiveness of clinical dashboards as audit and feedback or clinical decision support tools on medication use and test ordering: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022;29(10):1773–85. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocac094.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Main C, Moxham T, Wyatt JC, Kay J, Anderson R, Stein K. Computerised decision support systems in order communication for diagnostic, screening or monitoring test ordering: systematic reviews of the effects and cost-effectiveness of systems. 2010;14:48. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta14480.CrossRef

21.

El Asmar Ml, Dharmayat KI, Vallejo-Vaz AJ, Irwin R, Mastellos N. Effect of computerised, knowledge-based, clinical decision support systems on patient-reported and clinical outcomes of patients with chronic disease managed in primary care settings: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2021;11(12):e054659. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054659

22.

Liberati EG, Ruggiero F, Galuppo L, Gorli M, González-Lorenzo M, Maraldi M, et al. What hinders the uptake of computerized decision support systems in hospitals? A qualitative study and framework for implementation. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0644-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Khairat S, Marc D, Crosby W, Al SA. Reasons For Physicians Not Adopting Clinical Decision Support Systems: Critical Analysis. JMIR Med Inform. 2018;6(2): e24. https://doi.org/10.2196/medinform.8912.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Jansen-Kosterink S, van Velsen L, Cabrita M. Clinician acceptance of complex clinical decision support systems for treatment allocation of patients with chronic low back pain. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021;21(1):137. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01502-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Gross DP, Armijo-Olivo S, Shaw WS, Williams-Whitt K, Shaw NT, Hartvigsen J, et al. Clinical Decision Support Tools for Selecting Interventions for Patients with Disabling Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Scoping Review. J Occup Rehabil. 2016;26(3):286–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-015-9614-1.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Granviken F, Vasseljen O, Bach K, Jaiswal A, Meisingset I. Case-based reasoning: application of an Artificial Intelligence system in the management of common musculoskeletal pain complaints. JMIR Preprints. 2022. https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/44805

27.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Evensen KAI, Robinson HS, Meisingset I, Woodhouse A, Thielemann M, Bjorbækmo WS, et al. Characteristics, course and outcome of patients receiving physiotherapy in primary health care in Norway: design of a longitudinal observational project. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):936. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3729-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Davis FD. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q. 1989;13(3):319–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008.CrossRef

30.

Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Manage Sci. 1989;35(8):982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.CrossRef

31.

Edward D, Alicia O, Cathain, Nikki R, Liz C, Katie S, et al. Guidance for reporting intervention development studies in health research (GUIDED): an evidence-based consensus study. BMJ Open. 2020;10(4):e033516. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033516

32.

Victor S. An Introduction to Agile Software. 2004.

33.

Leau YB, Loo WK, Tham WY, Tan SF, editors. Software development life cycle AGILE vs traditional approaches. Singapore: International Conference on Information and Network Technology; 2012.

34.

Aamodt A, Plaza E. Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Communications IOS Press. 1994;7(1):39–59. https://doi.org/10.3233/AIC-1994-7104.CrossRef

35.

Hill JC, Kang S, Benedetto E, Myers H, Blackburn S, Smith S, et al. Development and initial cohort validation of the Arthritis Research UK Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ) for use across musculoskeletal care pathways. BMJ Open. 2016;6(8): e012331. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012331.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Dunn KM, Campbell P, Lewis M, Hill JC, van der Windt DA, Afolabi E, et al. Refinement and validation of a tool for stratifying patients with musculoskeletal pain. Eur J Pain. 2021;25(10):2081–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.1821.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Linton SJ, Nicholas M, MacDonald S. Development of a Short Form of the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36(22). https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e3181f8f775

38.

Meisingset I, Vasseljen O, Vøllestad NK, Robinson HS, Woodhouse A, Engebretsen KB, et al. Novel approach towards musculoskeletal phenotypes. Eur J Pain. 2020;24(5):921–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.1541.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):117. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Dragesund T, Nilsen RM, Kvåle A. Norwegian Psychomotor Physiotherapy versus Cognitive Patient Education and active physiotherapy—A randomized controlled trial. Physiother Res Int. 2021;26(2): e1891. https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.1891.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Stratford P, Gill C, Westaway M, et al. Assessing disability and change on individual patients: a report of a patient specific measure. Physiotherapy Canada. 1995;47(4):258–63.CrossRef

42.

Curry L, Reed MH. Electronic decision support for diagnostic imaging in a primary care setting. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011;18(3):267–70. https://doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000049.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Zheng K, Padman R, Johnson MP, Diamond HS. Understanding technology adoption in clinical care: Clinician adoption behavior of a point-of-care reminder system. Int J Med Inform. 2005;74(7):535–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2005.03.007.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Porat T, Delaney B, Kostopoulou O. The impact of a diagnostic decision support system on the consultation: perceptions of GPs and patients. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017;17(1):79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-017-0477-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Heselmans A, Aertgeerts B, Donceel P, Geens S, Van de Velde S, Ramaekers D. Family Physicians’ Perceptions and Use of Electronic Clinical Decision Support During the First Year of Implementation. J Med Syst. 2012;36(6):3677–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-012-9841-3.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Arts DL, Medlock SK, van Weert HCPM, Wyatt JC, Abu-Hanna A. Acceptance and barriers pertaining to a general practice decision support system for multiple clinical conditions: A mixed methods evaluation. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(4): e0193187. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193187.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Ibsen C, Schiøttz-Christensen B, Maribo T, Nielsen CV, Hørder M, Handberg C. “Keep it simple”: Perspectives of patients with low back pain on how to qualify a patient-centred consultation using patient-reported outcomes. Musculoskeletal Care. 2019;17(4):313–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.1417.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Meerhoff GA, van Dulmen SA, Maas MJ, Bakker-Jacobs A, Nijhuis-Van der Sanden MW, van der Wees PJ. Exploring the perspective of patients with musculoskeletal health problems in primary care on the use of patient-reported outcome measures to stimulate quality improvement in physiotherapist practice; a qualitative study. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice. 2021;37(9):993–1004. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2019.1678205

49.

Paul-Savoie E, Bourgault P, Potvin S, Gosselin E, Lafrenaye S. The Impact of Pain Invisibility on Patient-Centered Care and Empathetic Attitude in Chronic Pain Management. Pain Res Manage. 2018;2018:6375713. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6375713.CrossRef

50.

Naylor J, Killingback C, Green A. What are the views of musculoskeletal physiotherapists and patients on person-centred practice? A systematic review of qualitative studies. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2022:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2022.2055165

51.

Varonen H, Kortteisto T, Kaila M, for the ESG. What may help or hinder the implementation of computerized decision support systems (CDSSs): a focus group study with physicians. Fam Pract. 2008;25(3):162–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmn020

52.

Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared Decision Making — The Pinnacle of Patient-Centered Care. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(9):780–1. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1109283.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Tousignant-Laflamme Y, Christopher S, Clewley D, Ledbetter L, Cook CJ, Cook CE. Does shared decision making results in better health related outcomes for individuals with painful musculoskeletal disorders? A systematic review. J Man Manip Ther. 2017;25(3):144–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2017.1323607.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Morera-Balaguer J, Botella-Rico JM, Martínez-González MC, Medina-Mirapeix F, Rodríguez-Nogueira Ó. Physical therapists’ perceptions and experiences about barriers and facilitators of therapeutic patient-centred relationships during outpatient rehabilitation: a qualitative study. Braz J Phys Ther. 2018;22(6):484–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.04.003.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

55.

Cooper K, Smith BH, Hancock E. Patient-centredness in physiotherapy from the perspective of the chronic low back pain patient. Physiotherapy. 2008;94(3):244–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2007.10.006.CrossRef

56.

Morera-Balaguer J, Botella-Rico JM, Catalán-Matamoros D, Martínez-Segura O-R, Leal-Clavel M, Rodríguez-Nogueira Ó. Patients’ experience regarding therapeutic person-centered relationships in physiotherapy services: A qualitative study. Physiother Theory Pract. 2021;37(1):17–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2019.1603258.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Bishop MD, Mintken P, Bialosky JE, Cleland JA. Patient Expectations of Benefit From Interventions for Neck Pain and Resulting Influence on Outcomes. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2013;43(7):457–65. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2013.4492.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

58.

Chester R, Jerosch-Herold C, Lewis J, Shepstone L. Psychological factors are associated with the outcome of physiotherapy for people with shoulder pain: a multicentre longitudinal cohort study. Br J Sports Med. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-096084.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Foster NE, Bishop A, Thomas E, Main C, Horne R, Weinman J, et al. Illness perceptions of low back pain patients in primary care: What are they, do they change and are they associated with outcome? Pain. 2008;136(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2007.12.007

60.

Travers M. Qualitative Research Through Case Studies. London2001. Available from: https://methods.sagepub.com/book/qualitative-research-through-case-studies.

Title: Acceptance and use of a clinical decision support system in musculoskeletal pain disorders – the SupportPrim project
Authors: Fredrik Granviken
Ingebrigt Meisingset
Ottar Vasseljen
Kerstin Bach
Anita Formo Bones
Nina Elisabeth Klevanger
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keyword: Musculoskeletal Pain
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-023-02399-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Acceptance and use of a clinical decision support system in musculoskeletal pain disorders – the SupportPrim project

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Machine learning-based risk models for procedural complications of radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation

Machine learning and network analysis for diagnosis and prediction in disorders of consciousness

Extracting laboratory test information from paper-based reports

Machine-learning predictions for acute kidney injuries after coronary artery bypass grafting: a real-life muticenter retrospective cohort study

Leveraging machine learning approaches for predicting potential Lyme disease cases and incidence rates in the United States using Twitter

The classification of flash visual evoked potential based on deep learning