ABSTRACT
Background There is a need in clinical genomics for systems that assist in clinical diagnosis, analysis of genomic information and periodic re-analysis of results, and can utilize information from the electronic health record to do so. Such systems should be built using the concepts of human-centered design, fit within clinical workflows, and provide solutions to priority problems.
Methods We adapted a commercially available diagnostic decision support system (DDSS) to use extracted findings from a patient record and combine them with genomic variant information in the DDSS interface. Three representative patient cases were created in a simulated clinical environment for user testing. A semi-structured interview guide was created to illuminate factors relevant to human factors in CDS design and organizational implementation.
Results Six individuals completed the user testing process. Tester responses were positive and noted good fit with real-world clinical genetics workflow. Technical issues related to interface, interaction, and design were minor and fixable. Testers suggested solving issues related to terminology and usability through training and infobuttons. Time savings was estimated at 30-50% and additional uses such as in-house clinical variant analysis were suggested for increase fit with workflow and to further address priority problems.
Conclusion This study provides preliminary evidence for usability, workflow fit, acceptability, and implementation potential of a modified DDSS that includes machine-assisted chart review. Continued development and testing using principles from human-centered design and implementation science are necessary to improve technical functionality and acceptability for multiple stakeholders and organizational implementation potential to improve the genomic diagnosis process.
What is already known?
There is a need in clinical genomics for tools that assist in analysis of genomic information and can do so using information from the electronic health record.
Such tools should be easy to use, fit within clinical workflows, and provide solutions to priority problems as defined by clinician end-users.
Natural language processing (NLP) is a useful tool to read patient records and extract findings.
What does this paper add?
We demonstrated the use of Human-centered design and implementation science principles in a simulated environment for assessment of a new version of a decision support tool prior to large-scale implementation.
This study provides preliminary evidence that a clinical decision support tool with machine-assisted chart review is acceptable to clinical end-users, fits within the clinical workflow, and addresses perceived needs within the differential diagnosis process across all Mendelian genetic disorders.
Terminology codes for DDSSs should have levels of granularity tuned to the sensitivity and specificity appropriate to its various functions, e.g., NLP versus chart documentation.
Competing Interest Statement
LKF and MMS have an ownership stake in SimulConsult. MMS is PI of the NIH-funded Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grant. LKF and MMS provided the DDSS software to Geisinger for this research, including the modifications to enable the NLP and flagged findings, but were not involved in the user testing evaluation and analysis. All other authors declare no competing interests
Funding Statement
This study was supported by the National Human Genome Research Institute of the National Institutes of Health under the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program, Award Number 1R43HG010322-01 (principal investigator: MMS). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Geisinger IRB
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
study data are qualitative interview transcripts and are not made publicly available, however, authors may be contacted for information.
