Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2011 Jul-Aug;18(4):479-84.
doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2010-000039. Epub 2011 May 12.

Factors influencing alert acceptance: a novel approach for predicting the success of clinical decision support

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Factors influencing alert acceptance: a novel approach for predicting the success of clinical decision support

Hanna M Seidling et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011 Jul-Aug.

Abstract

Background: Clinical decision support systems can prevent knowledge-based prescription errors and improve patient outcomes. The clinical effectiveness of these systems, however, is substantially limited by poor user acceptance of presented warnings. To enhance alert acceptance it may be useful to quantify the impact of potential modulators of acceptance.

Methods: We built a logistic regression model to predict alert acceptance of drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts in three different settings. Ten variables from the clinical and human factors literature were evaluated as potential modulators of provider alert acceptance. ORs were calculated for the impact of knowledge quality, alert display, textual information, prioritization, setting, patient age, dose-dependent toxicity, alert frequency, alert level, and required acknowledgment on acceptance of the DDI alert.

Results: 50,788 DDI alerts were analyzed. Providers accepted only 1.4% of non-interruptive alerts. For interruptive alerts, user acceptance positively correlated with frequency of the alert (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.38), quality of display (4.75, 3.87 to 5.84), and alert level (1.74, 1.63 to 1.86). Alert acceptance was higher in inpatients (2.63, 2.32 to 2.97) and for drugs with dose-dependent toxicity (1.13, 1.07 to 1.21). The textual information influenced the mode of reaction and providers were more likely to modify the prescription if the message contained detailed advice on how to manage the DDI.

Conclusion: We evaluated potential modulators of alert acceptance by assessing content and human factors issues, and quantified the impact of a number of specific factors which influence alert acceptance. This information may help improve clinical decision support systems design.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Johnston D, Pan E, Walker J. The Value of CPOE in ambulatory settings. JHIM 2003;18:5–8 - PubMed
    1. Kaushal R, Shojania KG, Bates DW. Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety. A systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2003;16:1409–16 - PubMed
    1. Bobb A, Gleason K, Husch M, et al. The epidemiology of prescribing errors: the potential impact of computerized prescriber order entry. Arch Intern Med 2004;164:785–92 - PubMed
    1. Schedlbauer A, Prasad V, Mulvaney C, et al. What evidence supports the use of computerized alerts and prompts to improve clinicians prescribing behavior? J Am Med Inform Assoc 2009;16:531–8 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Garg AX, Adhikari NK, McDonald H, et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA 2005;293:1223–38 - PubMed

Publication types