School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, 85748 Garching bei München, Germany.
Institute of Information Systems and Digital Business, University of St. Gallen, 9000 St. Gallen, Switzerland.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2024 Jun 20;31(7):1608-1621. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocae096.
Healthcare providers employ heuristic and analytical decision-making to navigate the high-stakes environment of the emergency department (ED). Despite the increasing integration of information systems (ISs), research on their efficacy is conflicting. Drawing on related fields, we investigate how timing and mode of delivery influence IS effectiveness. Our objective is to reconcile previous contradictory findings, shedding light on optimal IS design in the ED.
We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA across PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. We coded the ISs' timing as heuristic or analytical, their mode of delivery as active for automatic alerts and passive when requiring user-initiated information retrieval, and their effect on process, economic, and clinical outcomes.
Our analysis included 83 studies. During early heuristic decision-making, most active interventions were ineffective, while passive interventions generally improved outcomes. In the analytical phase, the effects were reversed. Passive interventions that facilitate information extraction consistently improved outcomes.
Our findings suggest that the effectiveness of active interventions negatively correlates with the amount of information received during delivery. During early heuristic decision-making, when information overload is high, physicians are unresponsive to alerts and proactively consult passive resources. In the later analytical phases, physicians show increased receptivity to alerts due to decreased diagnostic uncertainty and information quantity. Interventions that limit information lead to positive outcomes, supporting our interpretation.
We synthesize our findings into an integrated model that reveals the underlying reasons for conflicting findings from previous reviews and can guide practitioners in designing ISs in the ED.
医疗保健提供者在急诊部(ED)的高风险环境中运用启发式和分析性决策来进行决策。尽管信息系统(IS)的整合程度不断提高,但关于其有效性的研究结果却存在冲突。我们借鉴相关领域的知识,研究了交付时间和方式如何影响 IS 的有效性。我们的目标是调和先前相互矛盾的发现,阐明 ED 中 IS 设计的最佳方案。
我们按照 PRISMA 准则在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science 上进行了系统综述。我们将 IS 的时间编码为启发式或分析式,其交付方式编码为主动式(自动警报)和被动式(需要用户发起信息检索),并对其对过程、经济和临床结果的影响进行编码。
我们的分析包括 83 项研究。在早期的启发式决策中,大多数主动干预措施无效,而被动干预措施通常会改善结果。在分析阶段,效果则相反。促进信息提取的被动干预措施始终可以改善结果。
我们的研究结果表明,主动干预措施的有效性与交付过程中接收的信息量呈负相关。在早期的启发式决策中,由于信息过载较高,医生对警报无反应,并且主动查询被动资源。在稍后的分析阶段,由于诊断不确定性和信息量减少,医生对警报的接受度增加。限制信息量的干预措施会产生积极的结果,这支持了我们的解释。
我们将研究结果综合成一个综合模型,揭示了先前综述中相互矛盾的发现的根本原因,并为从业人员在 ED 中设计 IS 提供了指导。