BACKGROUND: Medication-related decision support can reduce the frequency of preventable adverse drug events. However, the design of current medication alerts often results in alert fatigue and high over-ride rates, thus reducing any potential benefits. METHODS: The authors previously reviewed human-factors principles for relevance to medication-related decision support alerts. In this study, instrument items were developed for assessing the appropriate implementation of these human-factors principles in drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts. User feedback regarding nine electronic medical records was considered during the development process. Content validity, construct validity through correlation analysis, and inter-rater reliability were assessed. RESULTS: The final version of the instrument included 26 items associated with nine human-factors principles. Content validation on three systems resulted in the addition of one principle (Corrective Actions) to the instrument and the elimination of eight items. Additionally, the wording of eight items was altered. Correlation analysis suggests a direct relationship between system age and performance of DDI alerts (p=0.0016). Inter-rater reliability indicated substantial agreement between raters (κ=0.764). CONCLUSION: The authors developed and gathered preliminary evidence for the validity of an instrument that measures the appropriate use of human-factors principles in the design and display of DDI alerts. Designers of DDI alerts may use the instrument to improve usability and increase user acceptance of medication alerts, and organizations selecting an electronic medical record may find the instrument helpful in meeting their clinicians' usability needs.
BACKGROUND: Medication-related decision support can reduce the frequency of preventable adverse drug events. However, the design of current medication alerts often results in alert fatigue and high over-ride rates, thus reducing any potential benefits. METHODS: The authors previously reviewed human-factors principles for relevance to medication-related decision support alerts. In this study, instrument items were developed for assessing the appropriate implementation of these human-factors principles in drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts. User feedback regarding nine electronic medical records was considered during the development process. Content validity, construct validity through correlation analysis, and inter-rater reliability were assessed. RESULTS: The final version of the instrument included 26 items associated with nine human-factors principles. Content validation on three systems resulted in the addition of one principle (Corrective Actions) to the instrument and the elimination of eight items. Additionally, the wording of eight items was altered. Correlation analysis suggests a direct relationship between system age and performance of DDI alerts (p=0.0016). Inter-rater reliability indicated substantial agreement between raters (κ=0.764). CONCLUSION: The authors developed and gathered preliminary evidence for the validity of an instrument that measures the appropriate use of human-factors principles in the design and display of DDI alerts. Designers of DDI alerts may use the instrument to improve usability and increase user acceptance of medication alerts, and organizations selecting an electronic medical record may find the instrument helpful in meeting their clinicians' usability needs.
Authors: Nidhi R Shah; Andrew C Seger; Diane L Seger; Julie M Fiskio; Gilad J Kuperman; Barry Blumenfeld; Elaine G Recklet; David W Bates; Tejal K Gandhi Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2005-10-12 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Saul N Weingart; Brett Simchowitz; Harper Padolsky; Thomas Isaac; Andrew C Seger; Michael Massagli; Roger B Davis; Joel S Weissman Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-09-14
Authors: Hanna M Seidling; Shobha Phansalkar; Diane L Seger; Marilyn D Paterno; Shimon Shaykevich; Walter E Haefeli; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Gilad J Kuperman; Anne Bobb; Thomas H Payne; Anthony J Avery; Tejal K Gandhi; Gerard Burns; David C Classen; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2006-10-26 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: D W Bates; J M Teich; J Lee; D Seger; G J Kuperman; N Ma'Luf; D Boyle; L Leape Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 1999 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Marilyn D Paterno; Saverio M Maviglia; Paul N Gorman; Diane L Seger; Eileen Yoshida; Andrew C Seger; David W Bates; Tejal K Gandhi Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2008-10-24 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Elizabeth M Harry; Grace H Shin; Bridget A Neville; Stuart R Lipsitz; Gennady M Gorbovitsky; David W Bates; Jeffrey L Schnipper Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2019-08-21 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Alissa L Russ; Alan J Zillich; Brittany L Melton; Scott A Russell; Siying Chen; Jeffrey R Spina; Michael Weiner; Elizabette G Johnson; Joanne K Daggy; M Sue McManus; Jason M Hawsey; Anthony G Puleo; Bradley N Doebbeling; Jason J Saleem Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2014-03-25 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Shobha Phansalkar; Marianne Zachariah; Hanna M Seidling; Chantal Mendes; Lynn Volk; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Katrina M Romagnoli; Richard D Boyce; Philip E Empey; Solomon Adams; Harry Hochheiser Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: James Hayward; Fionagh Thomson; Heather Milne; Susan Buckingham; Aziz Sheikh; Bernard Fernando; Kathrin Cresswell; Robin Williams; Hilary Pinnock Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-03-07 Impact factor: 4.497