Download PDF
Appl Clin Inform 2024; 15(04): 727-732
DOI: 10.1055/a-2345-6475
CIC 2023

A Discount Approach to Reducing Nursing Alert Burden

Sarah A. Thompson
1   Information Services and Technology, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
,
Swaminathan Kandaswamy
2   Department of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
,
Evan Orenstein
1   Information Services and Technology, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
2   Department of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, United States
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Numerous programs have arisen to address interruptive clinical decision support (CDS) with the goals of reducing alert burden and alert fatigue. These programs often have standing committees with broad stakeholder representation, significant governance efforts, and substantial analyst hours to achieve reductions in alert burden which can be difficult for hospital systems to replicate.

Objective This study aimed to reduce nursing alert burden with a primary nurse informaticist and small support team through a quality-improvement approach focusing on high-volume alerts.

Methods Target alerts were identified from the period of January 2022 to April 2022 and four of the highest firing alerts were chosen initially, which accounted for 43% of all interruptive nursing alerts and an estimated 86 hours per month of time across all nurses occupied resolving these alerts per month. Work was done concurrently for each alert with design changes based on the Five Rights of CDS and following a quality-improvement framework. Priority for work was based on operational engagement for design review and approval. Once initial design changes were approved, alerts were taken for in situ usability testing and additional changes were made as needed. Final designs were presented to stakeholders for approval prior to implementation.

Results The total number of interruptive nursing alert firings decreased by 58% from preintervention period (1 January 2022–30 June 2022) to postintervention period (July 1, 2022–December 31, 2022). Action taken on alerts increased from 8.1 to 17.3%. The estimated time spent resolving interruptive alerts summed across all nurses in the system decreased from 197 hours/month to 114 hours/month.

Conclusion While CDS may improve use of evidence-based practices, implementation without a clear framework for evaluation and monitoring often results in alert burden and fatigue without clear benefits. An alert burden reduction effort spearheaded by a single empowered nurse informaticist efficiently reduced nursing alert burden substantially.

Keywords

clinical decision support - nursing alert burden - alert fatigue - quality improvement - nursing informaticist

Protection of Human and Animal Subjects

This work was felt to be primarily focused on quality improvement and therefore deemed nonhuman subjects research by the Institutional Review Board of Children's Healthcare of Atlanta.


Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 03 November 2023

Accepted: 12 June 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
14 June 2024

Article published online:
04 September 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Bright TJ, Wong A, Dhurjati R. et al. Effect of clinical decision-support systems: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2012; 157 (01) 29-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Garg AX, Adhikari NKJ, McDonald H. et al. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA 2005; 293 (10) 1223-1238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Chaudhry B, Wang J, Wu S. et al. Systematic review: impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144 (10) 742-752
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Murphy EV. Clinical decision support: effectiveness in improving quality processes and clinical outcomes and factors that may influence success. Yale J Biol Med 2014; 87 (02) 187-197
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Chaparro JD, Hussain C, Lee JA, Hehmeyer J, Nguyen M, Hoffman J. Reducing interruptive alert burden using quality improvement methodology. Appl Clin Inform 2020; 11 (01) 46-58
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ash JS, Sittig DF, Campbell EM, Guappone KP, Dykstra RH. Some unintended consequences of clinical decision support systems. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2007; 2007: 26-30
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 van der Sijs H, Aarts J, Vulto A, Berg M. Overriding of drug safety alerts in computerized physician order entry. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006; 13 (02) 138-147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Baysari MT, Tariq A, Day RO, Westbrook JI. Alert override as a habitual behavior - a new perspective on a persistent problem. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017; 24 (02) 409-412
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Embi PJ, Leonard AC. Evaluating alert fatigue over time to EHR-based clinical trial alerts: findings from a randomized controlled study. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012; 19 (e1): e145-e148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Backman R, Bayliss S, Moore D, Litchfield I. Clinical reminder alert fatigue in healthcare: a systematic literature review protocol using qualitative evidence. Syst Rev 2017; 6 (01) 255
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ancker JS, Edwards A, Nosal S, Hauser D, Mauer E, Kaushal R. with the HITEC Investigators. Effects of workload, work complexity, and repeated alerts on alert fatigue in a clinical decision support system. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2017; 17 (01) 36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 McCoy AB, Russo EM, Johnson KB. et al. Clinician collaboration to improve clinical decision support: the Clickbusters initiative. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2022; 29 (06) 1050-1059
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 McGreevey III JD, Mallozzi CP, Perkins RM, Shelov E, Schreiber R. Reducing alert burden in electronic health records: state of the art recommendations from four health systems. Appl Clin Inform 2020; 11 (01) 1-12
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Thompson SA, Ray E, Orenstein EW, Kandaswamy S. When alerts work as expected but not as intended: situation awareness for patients with cardiac shunt at high risk of rapid deterioration. American Medical Informatics Association Annual Symposium; 2022
    Google Scholar
  • 15 McDaniel RB, Burlison JD, Baker DK. et al. Alert dwell time: introduction of a measure to evaluate interruptive clinical decision support alerts. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2016; 23 (e1): e138-e141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Osheroff JA, Teich J, Levick D. et al. Improving Outcomes with Clinical Decision Support: An Implementer's Guide. 2nd ed. Chicago IL:: HIMSS Publishing;; 2012
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Langley GJ. ed. The Improvement Guide: A Practical Approach to Enhancing Organizational Performance. 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA:: Jossey-Bass;; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Orenstein EW, Boudreaux J, Rollins M. et al. Formative usability testing reduces severe blood product ordering errors. Appl Clin Inform 2019; 10 (05) 981-990
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Schumacher RM, Lowry SZ. NIST Guide to the Processes Approach for Improving the Usability of Electronic Health Records. Gaithursburg, MD:: National Institute of Standards and Technology;; 2010. :NIST IR 7741
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Miller K, Mosby D, Capan M. et al. Interface, information, interaction: a narrative review of design and functional requirements for clinical decision support. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2018; 25 (05) 585-592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar