Allison B McCoy1, Eric J Thomas2, Marie Krousel-Wood3, Dean F Sittig4. 1. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA ; Center for Health Research, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Houston, TX ; The University of Texas at Houston-Memorial Hermann Center for Healthcare Quality and Safety, Houston, TX. 3. Center for Health Research, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA ; Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA ; Department of Epidemiology, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA ; The University of Queensland School of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA. 4. The University of Texas at Houston-Memorial Hermann Center for Healthcare Quality and Safety, Houston, TX ; The University of Texas School of Biomedical Informatics at Houston, Houston, TX.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many healthcare providers are adopting clinical decision support (CDS) systems to improve patient safety and meet meaningful use requirements. Computerized alerts that prompt clinicians about drug-allergy, drug-drug, and drug-disease warnings or provide dosing guidance are most commonly implemented. Alert overrides, which occur when clinicians do not follow the guidance presented by the alert, can hinder improved patient outcomes. METHODS: We present a review of CDS alerts and describe a proposal to develop novel methods for evaluating and improving CDS alerts that builds upon traditional informatics approaches. Our proposal incorporates previously described models for predicting alert overrides that utilize retrospective chart review to determine which alerts are clinically relevant and which overrides are justifiable. RESULTS: Despite increasing implementations of CDS alerts, detailed evaluations rarely occur because of the extensive labor involved in manual chart reviews to determine alert and response appropriateness. Further, most studies have solely evaluated alert overrides that are appropriate or justifiable. Our proposal expands the use of web-based monitoring tools with an interactive dashboard for evaluating CDS alert and response appropriateness that incorporates the predictive models. The dashboard provides 2 views, an alert detail view and a patient detail view, to provide a full history of alerts and help put the patient's events in context. CONCLUSION: The proposed research introduces several innovations to address the challenges and gaps in alert evaluations. This research can transform alert evaluation processes across healthcare settings, leading to improved CDS, reduced alert fatigue, and increased patient safety.
BACKGROUND: Many healthcare providers are adopting clinical decision support (CDS) systems to improve patient safety and meet meaningful use requirements. Computerized alerts that prompt clinicians about drug-allergy, drug-drug, and drug-disease warnings or provide dosing guidance are most commonly implemented. Alert overrides, which occur when clinicians do not follow the guidance presented by the alert, can hinder improved patient outcomes. METHODS: We present a review of CDS alerts and describe a proposal to develop novel methods for evaluating and improving CDS alerts that builds upon traditional informatics approaches. Our proposal incorporates previously described models for predicting alert overrides that utilize retrospective chart review to determine which alerts are clinically relevant and which overrides are justifiable. RESULTS: Despite increasing implementations of CDS alerts, detailed evaluations rarely occur because of the extensive labor involved in manual chart reviews to determine alert and response appropriateness. Further, most studies have solely evaluated alert overrides that are appropriate or justifiable. Our proposal expands the use of web-based monitoring tools with an interactive dashboard for evaluating CDS alert and response appropriateness that incorporates the predictive models. The dashboard provides 2 views, an alert detail view and a patient detail view, to provide a full history of alerts and help put the patient's events in context. CONCLUSION: The proposed research introduces several innovations to address the challenges and gaps in alert evaluations. This research can transform alert evaluation processes across healthcare settings, leading to improved CDS, reduced alert fatigue, and increased patient safety.
Entities:
Keywords:
Decision support systems–clinical; electronic health records; medical order entry systems; medication errors; prevention and control; reminder systems
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: Robyn Tamblyn; Kristen Reidel; Allen Huang; Laurel Taylor; Nancy Winslade; Gillian Bartlett; Roland Grad; André Jacques; Martin Dawes; Pierre Larochelle; Alain Pinsonneault Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2009-08-12 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Amy J Grizzle; Maysaa H Mahmood; Yu Ko; John E Murphy; Edward P Armstrong; Grant H Skrepnek; William N Jones; Gregory P Schepers; W Paul Nichol; Antoun Houranieh; Donna C Dare; Christopher T Hoey; Daniel C Malone Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Adam Wright; Dean F Sittig; Joan S Ash; Joshua Feblowitz; Seth Meltzer; Carmit McMullen; Ken Guappone; Jim Carpenter; Joshua Richardson; Linas Simonaitis; R Scott Evans; W Paul Nichol; Blackford Middleton Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-03-17 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Allison B McCoy; Zachary L Cox; Erin B Neal; Lemuel R Waitman; Neeraja B Peterson; Gautam Bhave; Edward D Siew; Ioana Danciu; Julia B Lewis; Josh F Peterson Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Stephen D Persell; Nancy C Dolan; Elisha M Friesema; Jason A Thompson; Darren Kaiser; David W Baker Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2010-02-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Ross Koppel; Joshua P Metlay; Abigail Cohen; Brian Abaluck; A Russell Localio; Stephen E Kimmel; Brian L Strom Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-03-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Robert B McDaniel; Jonathan D Burlison; Donald K Baker; Murad Hasan; Jennifer Robertson; Christine Hartford; Scott C Howard; Andras Sablauer; James M Hoffman Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2015-10-24 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Kensaku Kawamanto; Michael C Flynn; Polina Kukhareva; David ElHalta; Rachel Hess; Travis Gregory; Chris Walls; Angela M Wigren; Damian Borbolla; Bruce E Bray; Mary H Parsons; Brett L Clayson; Melissa S Briley; Carole H Stipelman; Dean Taylor; Carrie S King; Guilherme Del Fiol; Thomas J Reese; Charlene R Weir; Teresa Taft; Micheal B Strong Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2018-12-05
Authors: Emily M Powers; Richard N Shiffman; Edward R Melnick; Andrew Hickner; Mona Sharifi Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Magaly Ramirez; Richard Maranon; Jeffery Fu; Janet S Chon; Kimberly Chen; Carol M Mangione; Gerardo Moreno; Douglas S Bell Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Devida Long; Muge Capan; Susan Mascioli; Danielle Weldon; Ryan Arnold; Kristen Miller Journal: Crit Care Nurse Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 1.708