Assessing physicians’ experiences with a clinical decision support system in patient blood management programme: a cross-sectional observational study
BMC Health Services Research, cilt.26, sa.1, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 26 Sayı: 1
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1186/s12913-025-13778-3
- Dergi Adı: BMC Health Services Research
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, ABI/INFORM, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Directory of Open Access Journals, Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO), Biomedical Reference Collection: Corporate Edition (EBSCO), Health Research Premium Collection (ProQuest)
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Blood management, CDSS, Face-to-face, Transfusion, Pop-up
- Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Background: Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) are increasingly being used to promote the use of evidence-based practices and improve the quality of healthcare. Patient Blood Management (PBM), an evidence-based approach endorsed by the World Health Organization, focuses on optimizing transfusion practices. This study evaluates the usability of a newly designed CDSS and physicians’ compliance with the CDSS to support PBM implementation in Turkiye. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess physicians’ experiences, attitudes, and the impact of CDSS on decision-making processes through a pilot CDSS program using a pop-up window initiated to improve the use of blood components in the Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Research Hospital. Results: The order of the 155 blood and blood components (BBC) via the Hospital Information System was assessed over two weeks, and a total of 155 physicians participated in the survey. Only 30.32% (n = 47) of participants read the pop-up window (PW), while 69.68% (n = 108) closed it without reviewing it. Although all physicians found PW beneficial and informative, most physicians (87%) did not alter their transfusion practices, as they believed BBC requests were made based on their knowledge on appropriate indications. It was observed that traditional face-to-face education increased the participants’ knowledge level and enabled them to read the information presented in PW. Conclusions: Although physicians perceived the CDSS as a useful source of current literature information, the CDSS's impact on decision-making behavior was limited, and physicians’ overall compliance remained low (30.3%). Physicians with more than five years of experience had higher reading rates than those with less experience (60.0% vs. 27.1%, p = 0.02). Time constraints and heavy workload were reported as the main reasons limiting system use. Clinical trial number: Not applicable.