Override rate of drug-drug interaction alerts in clinical decision support systems: A brief systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Informatics Journal Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1177/14604582241263242
Mariano Felisberto, Geovana Dos Santos Lima, Ianka Cristina Celuppi, Miliane Dos Santos Fantonelli, Wagner Luiz Zanotto, Júlia Meller Dias de Oliveira, Eduarda Talita Bramorski Mohr, Ranieri Alves Dos Santos, Daniel Henrique Scandolara, Célio Luiz Cunha, Jades Fernando Hammes, Júlia Salvan da Rosa, Izabel Galhardo Demarchi, Raul Sidnei Wazlawick, Eduardo Monguilhott Dalmarco
{"title":"Override rate of drug-drug interaction alerts in clinical decision support systems: A brief systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Mariano Felisberto, Geovana Dos Santos Lima, Ianka Cristina Celuppi, Miliane Dos Santos Fantonelli, Wagner Luiz Zanotto, Júlia Meller Dias de Oliveira, Eduarda Talita Bramorski Mohr, Ranieri Alves Dos Santos, Daniel Henrique Scandolara, Célio Luiz Cunha, Jades Fernando Hammes, Júlia Salvan da Rosa, Izabel Galhardo Demarchi, Raul Sidnei Wazlawick, Eduardo Monguilhott Dalmarco","doi":"10.1177/14604582241263242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Primary studies have demonstrated that despite being useful, most of the drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts generated by clinical decision support systems are overridden by prescribers. To provide more information about this issue, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of DDI alerts generated by CDSS and alert overrides by physicians. The search strategy was implemented by applying the terms and MeSH headings and conducted in the MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, and Google Scholar databases. Blinded reviewers screened 1873 records and 86 full studies, and 16 articles were included for analysis. The overall prevalence of alert generated by CDSS was 13% (CI95% 5-24%, <i>p</i>-value <0.0001, I^2 = 100%), and the overall prevalence of alert override by physicians was 90% (CI95% 85-95%, <i>p</i>-value <0.0001, I^2 = 100%). This systematic review and meta-analysis presents a high rate of alert overrides, even after CDSS adjustments that significantly reduced the number of alerts. After analyzing the articles included in this review, it was clear that the CDSS alerts physicians about potential DDI should be developed with a focus on the user experience, thus increasing their confidence and satisfaction, which may increase patient clinical safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":55069,"journal":{"name":"Health Informatics Journal","volume":"30 2","pages":"14604582241263242"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Informatics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14604582241263242","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Primary studies have demonstrated that despite being useful, most of the drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts generated by clinical decision support systems are overridden by prescribers. To provide more information about this issue, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of DDI alerts generated by CDSS and alert overrides by physicians. The search strategy was implemented by applying the terms and MeSH headings and conducted in the MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, and Google Scholar databases. Blinded reviewers screened 1873 records and 86 full studies, and 16 articles were included for analysis. The overall prevalence of alert generated by CDSS was 13% (CI95% 5-24%, p-value <0.0001, I^2 = 100%), and the overall prevalence of alert override by physicians was 90% (CI95% 85-95%, p-value <0.0001, I^2 = 100%). This systematic review and meta-analysis presents a high rate of alert overrides, even after CDSS adjustments that significantly reduced the number of alerts. After analyzing the articles included in this review, it was clear that the CDSS alerts physicians about potential DDI should be developed with a focus on the user experience, thus increasing their confidence and satisfaction, which may increase patient clinical safety.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床决策支持系统中药物相互作用警报的覆盖率:简短的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
初步研究表明,尽管临床决策支持系统生成的药物相互作用(DDI)警报非常有用,但大部分警报都被处方者所覆盖。为了提供有关这一问题的更多信息,我们对临床决策支持系统生成的 DDI 警报的普遍性以及医生对警报的覆盖情况进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。检索策略采用术语和 MeSH 标题,在 MEDLINE/PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science、Scopus、LILACS 和 Google Scholar 数据库中进行。盲审稿人筛选了 1873 条记录和 86 项完整研究,并纳入了 16 篇文章进行分析。CDSS 生成警报的总体流行率为 13%(CI95% 5-24%,p-value p-value
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Informatics Journal
Health Informatics Journal HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-MEDICAL INFORMATICS
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Health Informatics Journal is an international peer-reviewed journal. All papers submitted to Health Informatics Journal are subject to peer review by members of a carefully appointed editorial board. The journal operates a conventional single-blind reviewing policy in which the reviewer’s name is always concealed from the submitting author.
期刊最新文献
Empowering healthcare education: A multilingual ontology for medical informatics and digital health (MIMO) integrated to artificial intelligence powered training in smart hospitals. Analysis of health recommendations using longitudinal quality of life data: QoL@TbA - A transformer-based approach. Analysis of total RNA as a potential biomarker of developmental neurotoxicity in silico. Characterizing pituitary adenomas in clinical notes: Corpus construction and its application in LLMs. HealthCheck: A method for evaluating persuasive mobile health applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1