Burke's research published in JMLA

Congratulations to Marianne Burke, PhD, MA-AHIP, whose dissertation research came out in time for her to have it in her pocket for commencement!

Burke M, Littenberg B. Effect of a Clinical Evidence Technology on Skin Disease Outcomes in Primary Care: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of the Medical Library Association 2019; 107:151–162. http://jmla.mlanet.org/ojs/jmla/article/view/581  https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2019.581.

Objective: Providers’ use of clinical evidence technologies (CETs) improves their diagnosis and treatment decisions. Despite these benefits, few studies have evaluated the impact of CETs on patient outcomes. The investigators evaluated the effect of one CET, VisualDx, on skin problem outcomes in primary care.

Methods: A cluster-randomized controlled pragmatic trial was conducted in outpatient clinics at an academic medical center in the northeastern United States. Participants were primary care providers (PCPs), and their adult patients were seen for skin problems. The intervention was VisualDx, as used by PCPs. Outcomes were patient-reported time from index clinic visit to problem resolution, and the number of follow-up visits to any provider for the same problem. PCPs who were randomly assigned to the intervention agreed to use VisualDx as their primary evidence source for skin problems. Control group PCPs agreed not to use VisualDx. Investigators collected outcome data from patients by phone at thirty-day intervals. Cox proportional hazards models assessed time to resolution. Wilcoxon-rank sum tests and logistic regression compared the need for return appointments.

Results: Thirty-two PCPs and 433 patients participated. In proportional hazards modelling adjusted for provider clusters, the time from index visit to skin problem resolution was similar in both groups (hazard ratio=0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.70, 1.21; p=0.54). Patient follow-up appointments did not differ significantly between groups (odds ratio=1.26; CI=0.94, 1.70; p=0.29).

Conclusion: This pragmatic trial tested the effectiveness of VisualDx on patient-reported skin disease outcomes in a generalizable clinical setting. There was no difference in skin problem resolution or number of follow-up visits when PCPs used VisualDx.

- Ben Littenberg