Cited by 118Electronic Health Records SystemsPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes

Appropriateness of Overridden Alerts in Computerized Physician Order Entry: Systematic Review

Open access
Poly, Tahmina Nasrin, Islam, Md.Mohaimenul, Yang, Hsuan-Chia, Li, Yu-Chuan (Jack)·2020·JMIR Medical Informatics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The clinical decision support system (CDSS) has become an indispensable tool for reducing medication errors and adverse drug events. However, numerous studies have reported that CDSS alerts are often overridden. The increase in override rates has raised questions about the appropriateness of CDSS application along with concerns about patient safety and quality of care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to examine the override rate, the reasons for the alert override at the time of prescribing, and evaluate the appropriateness of overrides. METHODS: We searched electronic databases, including Google Scholar, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science, without language restrictions between January 1, 2000 and March 31, 2019. Two authors independently extracted data and crosschecked the extraction to avoid errors. The quality of the included studies was examined following Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: We included 23 articles in our systematic review. The range of average override alerts was 46.2%-96.2%. An average of 29.4%-100% of the overrides alerts were classified as appropriate, and the rate of appropriateness varied according to the alert type (drug-allergy interaction 63.4%-100%, drug-drug interaction 0%-95%, dose 43.9%-88.8%, geriatric 14.3%-57%, renal 27%-87.5%). The interrater reliability for the assessment of override alerts appropriateness was excellent (kappa=0.79-0.97). The most common reasons given for the override were "will monitor" and "patients have tolerated before." CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study show that alert override rates are high, and certain categories of overrides such as drug-drug interaction, renal, and geriatric were classified as inappropriate. Nevertheless, large proportions of drug duplication, drug-allergy, and formulary alerts were appropriate, suggesting that these groups of alerts can be primary targets to revise and update the system for reducing alert fatigue. Future efforts should also focus on optimizing alert types, providing clear information, and explaining the rationale of the alert so that essential alerts are not inappropriately overridden.

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 · 10.2196/15653

Cites

64 of 64 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?

  • High override rates of 56.3%-95.7% have already been described for DDI alerts.

    “High override rates of 56.3%-95.7% have already been described for DDI alerts [13, 21, 27–32].”

    From Overall performance of a drug–drug interaction clinical decision support system: quantitative evaluation and end-user survey (2022) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Results section, under “Override Rate and Appropriateness of Overrides,” reports DDI alert override rates of 56.3%–95.6%. This supports the claim that rates were high and its lower bound, but not the stated upper bound of 95.7%. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Our study results are in agreement with previous reports.

    “Our study results are in agreement with previous reports.”

    From Overall performance of a drug–drug interaction clinical decision support system: quantitative evaluation and end-user survey (2022) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Results section reports findings from 23 prior studies on alert overrides, but the citing sentence does not say which results are being compared. Our copy cannot establish whether the citing authors’ unspecified results agree with those reports (searched for agreement with previous reports and consistent results). (LLM, conf=0.68)

    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: 1

  1. [2]Berner E Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 2009 6 2019-05-08 Clinical decision support systemstate of the art (AHRQ Publication No 09-0069-EF) https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/page/09-0069-EF_1.pdf 31145565

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Poly, T. N., Islam, M. M., Yang, H.-C., & Li, Y.-C. (.
Affiliations
Wan Fang Hospital (TW)
Corresponding author
Li, Yu-Chuan (Jack)
Venue
JMIR Medical Informatics
Published
2020-07-20
Volume
8
Issue
7
Pages
e15653
ISSN
2291-9694 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3014693099
Cited by
118
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 2
FWCI
2.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Medical Informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Ministry of Education, India
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Keywords
clinical decision support systems, computerized physician order entry, alert override, alarm fatigue, drug-drug interaction alerts, drug allergy alerts, medication errors, patient safety

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