Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Dec;18 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i51-61.
doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2010-000053. Epub 2011 Apr 12.

Development and validation of a survey instrument for assessing prescribers' perception of computerized drug-drug interaction alerts

Kai Zheng  1 , Kathleen Fear, Bruce W Chaffee, Christopher R Zimmerman, Edward M Karls, Justin D Gatwood, James G Stevenson, Mark D Pearlman
Affiliations

Development and validation of a survey instrument for assessing prescribers' perception of computerized drug-drug interaction alerts

Kai Zheng et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To develop a theoretically informed and empirically validated survey instrument for assessing prescribers' perception of computerized drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts.

Materials and methods: The survey is grounded in the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology and an adapted accident causation model. Development of the instrument was also informed by a review of the extant literature on prescribers' attitude toward computerized medication safety alerts and common prescriber-provided reasons for overriding. To refine and validate the survey, we conducted a two-stage empirical validation study consisting of a pretest with a panel of domain experts followed by a field test among all eligible prescribers at our institution.

Results: The resulting survey instrument contains 28 questionnaire items assessing six theoretical dimensions: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, perceived fatigue, and perceived use behavior. Satisfactory results were obtained from the field validation; however, a few potential issues were also identified. We analyzed these issues accordingly and the results led to the final survey instrument as well as usage recommendations.

Discussion: High override rates of computerized medication safety alerts have been a prevalent problem. They are usually caused by, or manifested in, issues of poor end user acceptance. However, standardized research tools for assessing and understanding end users' perception are currently lacking, which inhibits knowledge accumulation and consequently forgoes improvement opportunities. The survey instrument presented in this paper may help fill this methodological gap.

Conclusion: We developed and empirically validated a survey instrument that may be useful for future research on DDI alerts and other types of computerized medication safety alerts more generally.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

References

    1. Bates DW, Leape LL, Cullen DJ, et al. Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. JAMA 1998;(15):1311–16 - PubMed
    1. Bates DW, Teich JM, Lee J, et al. The impact of computerized physician order entry on medication error prevention. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1999;6:313–21 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nightingale PG, Adu D, Richards NT, et al. Implementation of rules based computerised bedside prescribing and administration: intervention study. BMJ 2000;320:750–3 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Teich JM, Merchia PR, Schmiz JL, et al. Effects of computerized physician order entry on prescribing practices. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:2741–7 - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press, 2001 - PubMed

Publication types