Display and perception of risk: Analysis of decision support system display and its impact on perceived clinical risk of sepsis-induced health deterioration.

Despite acknowledging the value of clinical decision support systems (CDSS) in identifying risk for sepsis-induced health deterioration in-hospitalized patients, the relationship between display features, decision maker characteristics, and recognition of risk by the clinical decision maker remains an understudied, yet promising, area. The objective of this study is to explore the relationship between CDSS display design and perceived clinical risk of in-hospital mortality associated with sepsis. The study utilized data collected through in-person experimental sessions with 91 physicians from the general medical and surgical floors who were recruited across 12 teaching hospitals within the United States. Results of descriptive and statistical analyses provided evidence supporting the impact of display configuration and clinical case severity on perceived risk associated with in-hospital mortality. Specifically, findings showed that a high level of information (represented by the Predisposition, Infection, Response and Organ dysfunction (PIRO) score) and Figure display (as opposed to Text or baseline) increased awareness to recognizing the risk for in-hospital mortality of hospitalized sepsis patients. A CDSS display that synthesizes the optimal features associated with information level and design elements has the potential to enhance the quantification and communication of clinical risk in complex health conditions beyond sepsis.

Outcomes assessment of clinical information system implementation: a practical guide.

Healthcare information systems (HIS) play a vital role in quality of care and the organization's daily operations. Consequently, increasing numbers of clinicians have been involved in HIS implementation, particularly for clinical information systems (CIS). Implementation of these systems is a major organizational investment, and its outcomes must be assessed. The purpose of this article is to provide clinicians and frontline informaticians with a practical guide to assess these outcomes, focusing on outcome variables, assessment methods, and timing of assessment. Based on in-depth literature reviews and their empirical experiences, the authors identified 3 frequently used outcomes: user satisfaction, clinical outcomes, and financial impact. These outcomes have been assessed employing various methods, including randomized controlled trials, pre- and post-test studies, time and motion studies, surveys, and user testing. The timing for outcomes assessments varied depending on several factors, such as learning curves or patients conditions. In conclusion, outcomes assessment is essential for the success of healthcare information technology, and the CIS implementation team members must be prepared to conduct and/or facilitate these studies.