Cited by 43Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringElectronic Health Records Systems

Clinician Perception of the Effectiveness of an Automated Early Warning and Response System for Sepsis in an Academic Medical Center

Guidi, Jessica L., Clark, Katherine, Upton, Mark T., Faust, Hilary, Umscheid, Craig A., Lane-Fall, Meghan B., Mikkelsen, Mark E., Schweickert, William D. +7 more·2015·Annals of the American Thoracic Society

Abstract

Rationale: We implemented an electronic early warning and response system (EWRS) to improve detection of and response to severe sepsis. Sustainability of such a system requires stakeholder acceptance. We hypothesized that clinicians receiving such alerts perceive them to be useful and effective. Objectives: To survey clinicians after EWRS notification about perceptions of the system. Methods: For a 6-week study period 1 month after EWRS implementation in a large tertiary referral medical center, bedside clinicians, including providers (physicians, advanced practice providers) and registered nurses (RNs), were surveyed confidentially within 2 hours of an alert. Measurements and Main Results: For the 247 alerts that triggered, 127 providers (51%) and 105 RNs (43%) completed the survey. Clinicians perceived most patients as stable before and after the alert. Approximately half (39% providers, 48% RNs) felt the alert provided new information, and about half (44% providers, 56% RNs) reported changes in management as a result of the alert, including closer monitoring and additional interventions. Over half (54% providers, 65% RNs) felt the alert was appropriately timed. Approximately one-third found the alert helpful (33% providers, 40% RNs) and fewer felt it improved patient care (24% providers, 35% RNs). Conclusions: A minority of responders perceived the EWRS to be useful, likely related to the perception that most patients identified were stable. However, management was altered half the time after an alert. These results suggest further improvements to the system are needed to enhance clinician perception of the system’s utility.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1513/annalsats.201503-129oc

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Two previous studies examining predictive alerts for sepsis suggested that perceived utility decreased when the model frequently identified clinically stable patients.

    “Similarly, 2 previous studies examining predictive alerts for sepsis suggested that the perceived utility decreased when the model frequently identified clinically stable patients [27,28].”
  • The same previous studies found that false positives from other nonsepsis etiologies could increase alarm fatigue.

    “They also found that false positives from other nonsepsis etiologies could increase alarm fatigue.”
  • Many models have been developed to improve timely identification of sepsis, but their lack of adoption has led to an implementation gap in early warning systems for sepsis.

    “Many models have been developed to improve timely identification of sepsis,4,5,6,7,8,9 but their lack of adoption has led to an implementation gap in early warning systems for sepsis.10,11”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guidi, J. L., Clark, K., Upton, M. T., Faust, H., Umscheid, C. A., Lane-Fall, M. B., Mikkelsen, M. E., Schweickert, W. D., Vanzandbergen, C. A., Betesh, J., Tait, G., Hanish, A., Smith, K., Feeley, D., & Fuchs, B. D.
Affiliations
  • Pediatrics and Genetics (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania Health System (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Information Services and
Corresponding author
Fuchs, Barry D.
Venue
Annals of the American Thoracic Society
Published
2015-10-01
Volume
12
Issue
10
Pages
1514-1519
ISSN
  • 2325-6621 (ISSN-L)
  • 2329-6933
OpenAlex
W1921056797
Cited by
43
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of the American Thoracic Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
Keywords
sepsis, clinician perceptions, stakeholder acceptance, electronic health records, patient monitoring, academic medical centers
MeSH terms
Academic Medical Centers, Attitude of Health Personnel, Patient Care, Humans, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sepsis, Early Diagnosis, Medical Order Entry Systems

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