A computerized intervention to improve timing of outpatient follow-up
Objective: To evaluate a computerized scheduling model that employs nonlinear optimization to recommend optimal follow-up intervals for patients taking warfarin.
Design: Randomized trial.Setting: 5 anticoagulation clinics.
Patients/participants: 620 patients expected to receive warfarin for ≥6 weeks.
Interventions: Computer-generated recommendations for scheduling the next visit were presented to or withheld from practitioners.
Measurements and main results: The main outcome measures were the follow-up interval scheduled by the provider, the interval at which the patient actually returned to clinic, and the quality of anticoagulation control (computed as the absolute difference between the measured and target prothrombin times [PTRs] or international normalized ratios [INRs]). Follow-up intervals scheduled for the patients whose practitioners received computer-generated recommendations were significantly longer than those for control patients (mean, 4.4 vs 3.5 weeks, p<0.001), despite the fact that the practitioners modified the suggested return interval by >1 week on 40% of the visits. The interval at which the intervention group actually returned to clinic was also longer (mean, 4.4 vs 4.1 weeks, p<0.05), even though the control patients tended to return at longer intervals than were scheduled by their practitioners. Control of anticoagulation was nearly the same among experimental and control patients. Life-threatening complications occurred in the care of three experimental patients and one control patient, while other serious complications occurred in the care of 16 experimental patients and 17 control patients.
Conclusions: Recommendations based on nonlinear optimization prompted clinicians to schedule less frequent follow-up for patients taking warfarin, with no deterioration in anticoagulation control. This approach to scheduling can potentially reduce utilization while maintaining quality of care for patients who require long-term monitoring.
Key wordspatient warfarin follow-up monitoring scheduling computers
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Dittus RS, Tierney WM. Scheduling follow-up office visits: physician variability [abstract]. Clin Res. 1987;35:738A.Google Scholar
- 4.National Center for Health Statistics, Cypress BK. Patterns of ambulatory care in internal medicine. The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. United States, January 1980–December 1981. Vital and Health Statistics, Series 13, No. 80. DHHS Pub. no. 84-1741. Public Health Service, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, Sep 1984.Google Scholar
- 6.Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Study Group Investigators. Preliminary report of the Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Study. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:863–8.Google Scholar
- 23.Teinders TP, Steinke WE. Pharmacist management of anticoagulant therapy in ambulant patients. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1979;36:645–58.Google Scholar
- 34.Gottlieb LK, Salem-Schatz S. Anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation: does efficacy in clinical trials translate into effectiveness in practice? [abstract]. Clin Res. 1992;40:582A.Google Scholar
- 37.Karatzas I, Shreve LE. Brownian Motion and Stochastic Calculus. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1988.Google Scholar
- 38.Edgington ES. Randomization Tests, 2nd Ed. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1987.Google Scholar
- 39.Noreen EW. Computer Methods of Hypothesis Testing: An Introduction. New York: John Wiley, 1989.Google Scholar