BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) with clinical decision support (CDS) have shown to be effective at improving patient safety. Despite this, alerts delivered as part of CDS are overridden frequently, which is of concern in the critical care population as this group may have an increased risk of harm. Our organization recently transitioned from an internally-developed EHR to a commercial system. Data comparing various EHR systems, especially after transitions between EHRs, are needed to identify areas for improvement. OBJECTIVES: To compare the two systems and identify areas for potential improvement with the new commercial system at a single institution. METHODS: Overridden medication-related CDS alerts were included from October to December of the systems' respective years (legacy, 2011; commercial, 2015), restricted to three intensive care units. The two systems were compared with regards to CDS presentation and override rates for four types of CDS: drug-allergy, drug-drug interaction (DDI), geriatric and renal alerts. A post hoc analysis to evaluate for adverse drug events (ADEs) potentially resulting from overridden alerts was performed for 'contraindicated' DDIs via chart review. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in provider exposure to alerts and alert overrides in the commercial system (commercial: n=5,535; legacy: n=1,030). Rates of overrides were higher for the allergy and DDI alerts (p<0.001) in the commercial system. Geriatric and renal alerts were significantly different in incidence and presentation between the two systems. No ADEs were identified in an analysis of 43 overridden contraindicated DDI alerts. CONCLUSIONS: The vendor system had much higher rates of both alerts and overrides, although we did not find evidence of harm in a review of DDIs which were overridden. We propose recommendations for improving our current system which may be helpful to other similar institutions; improving both alert presentation and the underlying knowledge base appear important.
BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) with clinical decision support (CDS) have shown to be effective at improving patient safety. Despite this, alerts delivered as part of CDS are overridden frequently, which is of concern in the critical care population as this group may have an increased risk of harm. Our organization recently transitioned from an internally-developed EHR to a commercial system. Data comparing various EHR systems, especially after transitions between EHRs, are needed to identify areas for improvement. OBJECTIVES: To compare the two systems and identify areas for potential improvement with the new commercial system at a single institution. METHODS: Overridden medication-related CDS alerts were included from October to December of the systems' respective years (legacy, 2011; commercial, 2015), restricted to three intensive care units. The two systems were compared with regards to CDS presentation and override rates for four types of CDS: drug-allergy, drug-drug interaction (DDI), geriatric and renal alerts. A post hoc analysis to evaluate for adverse drug events (ADEs) potentially resulting from overridden alerts was performed for 'contraindicated' DDIs via chart review. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in provider exposure to alerts and alert overrides in the commercial system (commercial: n=5,535; legacy: n=1,030). Rates of overrides were higher for the allergy and DDI alerts (p<0.001) in the commercial system. Geriatric and renal alerts were significantly different in incidence and presentation between the two systems. No ADEs were identified in an analysis of 43 overridden contraindicated DDI alerts. CONCLUSIONS: The vendor system had much higher rates of both alerts and overrides, although we did not find evidence of harm in a review of DDIs which were overridden. We propose recommendations for improving our current system which may be helpful to other similar institutions; improving both alert presentation and the underlying knowledge base appear important.
Authors: Melissa T Baysari; Margaret H Reckmann; Ling Li; Richard O Day; Johanna I Westbrook Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-06-26 Impact factor: 4.497
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: Insook Cho; Sarah P Slight; Karen C Nanji; Diane L Seger; Nivethietha Maniam; Julie M Fiskio; Patricia C Dykes; David W Bates Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2015-05-09 Impact factor: 4.046
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: Dionissios Neofytos; Lindsey R Lombardi; Ryan K Shields; Darin Ostrander; Lindsay Warren; M Hong Nguyen; Carol B Thompson; Kieren A Marr Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Thomas H Payne; Lisa E Hines; Raymond C Chan; Seth Hartman; Joan Kapusnik-Uner; Alissa L Russ; Bruce W Chaffee; Christian Hartman; Victoria Tamis; Brian Galbreth; Peter A Glassman; Shobha Phansalkar; Heleen van der Sijs; Sheila M Gephart; Gordon Mann; Howard R Strasberg; Amy J Grizzle; Mary Brown; Gilad J Kuperman; Chris Steiner; Amanda Sullins; Hugh Ryan; Michael A Wittie; Daniel C Malone Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Adrian Wong; Mary G Amato; Diane L Seger; Sarah P Slight; Patrick E Beeler; Patricia C Dykes; Julie M Fiskio; Elizabeth R Silvers; E John Orav; Tewodros Eguale; David W Bates Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2017-02-20 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: David J Graham; Judy A Staffa; Deborah Shatin; Susan E Andrade; Stephanie D Schech; Lois La Grenade; Jerry H Gurwitz; K Arnold Chan; Michael J Goodman; Richard Platt Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-11-22 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Dustin S McEvoy; Dean F Sittig; Thu-Trang Hickman; Skye Aaron; Angela Ai; Mary Amato; David W Bauer; Gregory M Fraser; Jeremy Harper; Angela Kennemer; Michael A Krall; Christoph U Lehmann; Sameer Malhotra; Daniel R Murphy; Brandi O'Kelley; Lipika Samal; Richard Schreiber; Hardeep Singh; Eric J Thomas; Carl V Vartian; Jennifer Westmorland; Allison B McCoy; Adam Wright Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Dean F Sittig; Adam Wright; Enrico Coiera; Farah Magrabi; Raj Ratwani; David W Bates; Hardeep Singh Journal: Health Informatics J Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Sara Ibáñez-Garcia; Carmen Rodriguez-Gonzalez; Vicente Escudero-Vilaplana; Maria Luisa Martin-Barbero; Belén Marzal-Alfaro; Jose Luis De la Rosa-Triviño; Irene Iglesias-Peinado; Ana Herranz-Alonso; Maria Sanjurjo Saez Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Mary Grace Fitzmaurice; Adrian Wong; Hannah Akerberg; Simona Avramovska; Pamela L Smithburger; Mitchell S Buckley; Sandra L Kane-Gill Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Michael P Friebe; Joseph R LeGrand; Bryan E Shepherd; Elizabeth A Breeden; Scott D Nelson Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2020-12-30 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Adam Wright; Dustin S McEvoy; Skye Aaron; Allison B McCoy; Mary G Amato; Hyun Kim; Angela Ai; James J Cimino; Bimal R Desai; Robert El-Kareh; William Galanter; Christopher A Longhurst; Sameer Malhotra; Ryan P Radecki; Lipika Samal; Richard Schreiber; Eric Shelov; Anwar Mohammad Sirajuddin; Dean F Sittig Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 4.497