An experimental investigation of the impact of alert frequency and relevance on alert dwell time.

AIM: This study aimed to determine the impact of alert frequency and relevance on alert dwell time. METHOD: A 2 × 3 design was used where 127 university students completed 60 prescribing tasks and were presented with a variable frequency of computerized alerts (low, medium and high) with variable relevance (low and high). Participants were instructed to override an alert if it was not relevant to their prescription, and to cancel the order if the alert signalled an error in their order. RESULTS: Participants presented with a small number of alerts spent more time attending to alert content than participants presented with a medium or high number of alerts (respectively median 15.6 s vs 10.8 vs 10.2 s). Alert relevance had no impact on alert dwell time. Alerts requiring an override response were 4.5 times more likely to be correctly actioned than alerts requiring the order to be cancelled. DISCUSSION: Dwell time was influenced by alert frequency, with greater exposure to alerts associated with shorter dwell times. We hypothesize that this was because participants came to learn that spending time on alert information was unnecessary. We propose that when users experience no consequences or feedback from overriding alerts they quickly learn that this action is more efficient and so more rewarding than taking any other action.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a hospital electronic medication management system.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of a hospital electronic medication management system (eMMS). METHODS: We compared costs and benefits of paper-based prescribing with a commercial eMMS (CSC MedChart) on one cardiology ward in a major 326-bed teaching hospital, assuming a 15-year time horizon and a health system perspective. The eMMS implementation and operating costs were obtained from the study site. We used data on eMMS effectiveness in reducing potential adverse drug events (ADEs), and potential ADEs intercepted, based on review of 1 202 patient charts before (n = 801) and after (n = 401) eMMS. These were combined with published estimates of actual ADEs and their costs. RESULTS: The rate of potential ADEs following eMMS fell from 0.17 per admission to 0.05; a reduction of 71%. The annualized eMMS implementation, maintenance, and operating costs for the cardiology ward were A$61 741 (US$55 296). The estimated reduction in ADEs post eMMS was approximately 80 actual ADEs per year. The reduced costs associated with these ADEs were more than sufficient to offset the costs of the eMMS. Estimated savings resulting from eMMS implementation were A$63-66 (US$56-59) per admission (A$97 740-$102 000 per annum for this ward). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated results were robust when both eMMS effectiveness and costs of actual ADEs were varied substantially. CONCLUSION: The eMMS within this setting was more effective and less expensive than paper-based prescribing. Comparison with the few previous full economic evaluations available suggests a marked improvement in the cost-effectiveness of eMMS, largely driven by increased effectiveness of contemporary eMMs in reducing medication errors.