Cited by 32Healthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringElectronic Health Records SystemsPatient Safety and Medication Errors

Frequency of passive EHR alerts in the ICU: another form of alert fatigue?

Open access
Kizzier-Carnahan, Vanessa, Artis, Kathryn A., Mohan, Vishnu, Gold, Jeffrey A.·2019·Journal of Patient Safety

Abstract

Objectives: The intensive care unit (ICU) is a complex environment in terms of data density and alerts, with alert fatigue, a recognized barrier to patient safety. The Electronic Health Record (EHR) is a major source of these alerts. Although studies have looked at the incidence and impact of active EHR alerts, little research has studied the impact of passive data alerts on patient safety. Method: We reviewed the EHR database of 100 consecutive ICU patient records; within, we assessed the number of values flagged as either as abnormal or “panic” across all data domains. We used data from our previous studies to determine the 10 most commonly visited screens while preparing for rounds to determine the total number of times, an abnormal value would be expected to be viewed. Results: There were 64.1 passive alerts/patient per day, of which only 4.5% were panic values. When accounting for the commonly used EHR screens by providers, this was increased to 165.3 patient/d. Laboratory values comprised 71% of alerts, with the remaining occurring in vitals (25%) and medications (6%). Despite the high prevalence of alerts, certain domains including ventilator settings (0.04 flags/d) were rarely flagged. Conclusions: The average ICU patient generates a large number of passive alerts daily, many of which may be clinically irrelevant. Issues with EHR design and use likely further magnify this problem. Our results establish the need for additional studies to understand how a high burden of passive alerts impact clinical decision making and how to design passive alerts to optimize their clinical utility.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/pts.0000000000000270

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Critical care patients generate approximately 100 EHR alerts for end-users per day.

    “One study showed that critical care patients generate approximately 100 EHR alerts for end-users per day.”

    From Qualitative Study of Inpatient Hospital Medicine Interruptive Alerts and Clinical Decision Support (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Results (page not specified) report a mean of 64.1 passive EHR alerts generated per ICU patient per day, rising to 165.3 when repeated appearances during chart review are counted. The study supports substantial daily alert exposure, but neither measure is approximately 100 alerts, and its findings concern passive alerts rather than all EHR alerts. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. [2]Keller JP Jr Clinical alarm hazards: a “top ten” health technology safety concern. J Electrocardiol. 2012; 45: 588– 591. 23022300
  2. [3]Commission TJ The Joint Commission announces 2014 National Patient Safety Goal. In: Commission TJ, ed. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/JCP0713_Announce_New_NSPG.pdf. Accessed on November 15, 2015. 24137865
  3. [4]van der Sijs H Mulder A van Gelder T Drug safety alert generation and overriding in a large Dutch university medical centre. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2009; 18: 941– 947. 19579216
  4. [5]Lin CP Payne TH Nichol WP Evaluating clinical decision support systems: monitoring CPOE order check override rates in the Department of Veterans Affairs' Computerized Patient Record System. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008; 15: 620– 626. 18579840 PMC2528033
  5. [6]Scheepers-Hoeks AM Grouls RJ Neef C Physicians' responses to clinical decision support on an intensive care unit–comparison of four different alerting methods. Artif Intell Med. 2013; 59: 33– 38. 23746663
  6. [7]Singh H Spitzmueller C Petersen NJ Information overload and missed test results in electronic health record-based settings. JAMA Intern Med. 2013; 173: 702– 704. 23460235 PMC3822526
  7. [8]Manor-Shulman O Beyene J Frndova H Quantifying the volume of documented clinical information in critical illness. J Crit Care. 2008; 23: 245– 250. 18538218
  8. [9]Carlsson L Lind L Larsson A Reference values for 27 clinical chemistry tests in 70-year-old males and females. Gerontology. 2010; 56: 259– 265. 19844080
  9. [10]Kilickaya O Schmickl C Ahmed A Customized reference ranges for laboratory values decrease false positive alerts in intensive care unit patients. PLoS One. 2014; 9: e107930. 25233485 PMC4169437
  10. [11]Gold JA Stephenson LE Gorsuch A Feasibility of utilizing a commercial eye tracker to assess electronic health record use during patient simulation. Health Informatics J. 2016; 22: 744– 57. 26142432
  11. [12]Ventilation with lower tidal volumes as compared with traditional tidal volumes for acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. The Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network. N Engl J Med. 2000; 342: 1301– 1308. 10793162
  12. [13]Ward NS Afessa B Kleinpell R Intensivist/patient ratios in closed ICUs: a statement from the Society of Critical Care Medicine Taskforce on ICU Staffing. Crit Care Med. 2013; 41: 638– 645. 23263586
  13. [14]Neuraz A Guerin C Payet C Patient Mortality Is Associated With Staff Resources and Workload in the ICU: a multicenter observational study. Crit Care Med. 2015; 43: 1587– 1594. 25867907
  14. [16]Ridgely MS Greenberg MD Too many alerts, too much liability: sorting through the malpractice implications of drug-drug interaction clinical decision support. Saint Louis University Journal of Health Law & Policy. 2012; 5: 257– 296.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kizzier-Carnahan, V., Artis, K. A., Mohan, V., & Gold, J. A.
Affiliations
  • Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Kizzier-Carnahan, Vanessa
  • Artis, Kathryn A.
  • Gold, Jeffrey A.
Venue
Journal of Patient Safety
Published
2016-06-22
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
246-250
ISSN
  • 1549-8417 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-8425
OpenAlex
W2468571596
Cited by
32
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3
FWCI
1.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Patient Safety (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01 HS023793, R18HS021637)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
Keywords
alarm fatigue, electronic health records, intensive care unit, patient safety, laboratory abnormalities, EHR design, clinical decision-making
MeSH terms
Fatigue, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Middle Aged, Electronic Health Records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review