Clinical decision making in prostate cancer care—evaluation of EAU-guidelines use and novel decision support software

Abstract

Abstract Keeping up to date with the latest clinical advances in prostate cancer can be challenging. We investigated the impact of guideline use on quality of treatment decisions as well as the impact of a novel, CE-certified clinical decision support tool (Siemens AIPC software) on the amount of time clinicians spend on decision-making in a multicenter setting. Ten urologists assessed ten clinical cases (screening and localized prostate cancer) in three settings: without support, using a digital version of the EAU guidelines, and with the AIPC tool, resulting in 300 clinical decisions. Comparison involved time spent, decision correct- and completeness. Using AIPC compared to digital guidelines led to a significant reduction of expenditure of time at a per case level (3.57 min and 0:14 min, p < 0.01) and for overall time per urologist (39.45 min and 02:20 min, p < 0.01). Decision options without guidelines support, online guideline usage and usage of AIPC were complete in 61%, 80% and 100%, respectively (p < 0.01). Decision making without guidelines support, online guideline usage and usage of AIPC was correct including all options in 28%, 66% and 100%, respectively (p < 0.01). Clinical decision support systems have the potential to reduces decision-making time and to enhance decision quality.