↓ Skip to main content

Reduced Effectiveness of Interruptive Drug-Drug Interaction Alerts after Conversion to a Commercial Electronic Health Record

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
47 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
Title
Reduced Effectiveness of Interruptive Drug-Drug Interaction Alerts after Conversion to a Commercial Electronic Health Record
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11606-018-4415-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Wright, Skye Aaron, Diane L. Seger, Lipika Samal, Gordon D. Schiff, David W. Bates

Abstract

Drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts in electronic health records (EHRs) can help prevent adverse drug events, but such alerts are frequently overridden, raising concerns about their clinical usefulness and contribution to alert fatigue. To study the effect of conversion to a commercial EHR on DDI alert and acceptance rates. Two before-and-after studies. 3277 clinicians who received a DDI alert in the outpatient setting. Introduction of a new, commercial EHR and subsequent adjustment of DDI alerting criteria. Alert burden and proportion of alerts accepted. Overall interruptive DDI alert burden increased by a factor of 6 from the legacy EHR to the commercial EHR. The acceptance rate for the most severe alerts fell from 100 to 8.4%, and from 29.3 to 7.5% for medium severity alerts (P < 0.001). After disabling the least severe alerts, total DDI alert burden fell by 50.5%, and acceptance of Tier 1 alerts rose from 9.1 to 12.7% (P < 0.01). Changing from a highly tailored DDI alerting system to a more general one as part of an EHR conversion decreased acceptance of DDI alerts and increased alert burden on users. The decrease in acceptance rates cannot be fully explained by differences in the clinical knowledge base, nor can it be fully explained by alert fatigue associated with increased alert burden. Instead, workflow factors probably predominate, including timing of alerts in the prescribing process, lack of differentiation of more and less severe alerts, and features of how users interact with alerts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 28 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 27%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Computer Science 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 29 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 November 2018.
All research outputs
#1,456,257
of 25,757,133 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1,133
of 8,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,538
of 342,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#28
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,757,133 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,253 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,056 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.