Efficacy of a clinical decision support tool to promote guideline-concordant evaluations in patients with high-risk microscopic hematuria: A cluster randomized quality improvement project Journal Article


Authors: Matulewicz, R. S.; Tsuruo, S.; King, W. C.; Nagler, A. R.; Feuer, Z. S.; Szerencsy, A.; Makarov, D. V.; Wong, C.; Dapkins, I.; Horwitz, L. I.; Blecker, S.
Article Title: Efficacy of a clinical decision support tool to promote guideline-concordant evaluations in patients with high-risk microscopic hematuria: A cluster randomized quality improvement project
Abstract: Purpose:We aimed to determine whether implementation of a clinical decision support (CDS) tool integrated into the electronic health record of a multisite academic medical center increased the proportion of patients with AUA "high-risk"microscopic hematuria (MH) who receive guideline-concordant evaluations.Materials and Methods:We conducted a 2-arm cluster randomized quality improvement project in which 202 ambulatory sites from a large health system were randomized to either have their physicians receive at time of test results an automated CDS alert for patients with high-risk MH with associated recommendations for imaging and cystoscopy (intervention) or usual care (control). Primary outcome was met if a patient underwent both imaging and cystoscopy within 180 days from MH result. Secondary outcomes assessed individual completion of imaging, cystoscopy, or placement of imaging orders.Results:There were 917 patients randomized to intervention (n=476) or control (n=441) arms between October and December 2021. The percentage of eligible patients for whom the alert correctly triggered in the intervention arm was 83%. Primary outcome was achieved in 0.6% vs 0.9% (relative risk 0.69; 95% CI 0.15, 3.10) of patients in the intervention and control arms, respectively. Patients in the intervention and control groups had similar rates of completed imaging (17.7% vs 14.7%) and cystoscopy (1.5% vs 0.9%). Those in the intervention arm had a higher likelihood of CT urogram order (5.5% vs 1.1%, P=.003) and a nonsignificant increase in urology evaluation (11.1% vs 7.5%, P=.09).Conclusions:Implementing an electronic health record-integrated CDS tool to promote evaluation of patients with high-risk MH did not lead to improvements in patient completion of a full guideline-concordant evaluation. The development of an algorithm to trigger a CDS alert was demonstrated to be feasible and effective. Further multilevel assessment of barriers to evaluation is necessary to continue to improve the approach to evaluating high-risk patients with MH. © 2025 by AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, INC.
Keywords: randomized trial; microscopic hematuria; clinical decision support tool
Journal Title: Journal of Urology
Volume: 213
Issue: 5
ISSN: 0022-5347
Publisher: Elsevier Science, Inc.  
Date Published: 2025-05-01
Start Page: 558
End Page: 567
Language: English
DOI: 10.1097/ju.0000000000004436
PUBMED: 39854625
PROVIDER: scopus
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- MSK Cancer Center Support Grant (P30 CA008748) acknowledged in PDF -- MSK corresponding author is Richard Matulewicz -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors