Usability |
1. The alert provides clear clinical guidance. |
47 (32.9%) |
81 (56.6%) |
5 (3.5%) |
10 (7.0%) |
0 (0.0%) |
2. The alert is useful in identifying deteriorating patients. |
33 (23.7%) |
78 (56.1%) |
10 (7.2%) |
16 (11.5%) |
2 (1.4%) |
Accuracy |
1. All patients who trigger the sepsis alert should be started on the sepsis pathway. |
19 (13.4%) |
30 (21.1%) |
12 (8.5%) |
67 (47.2%) |
14 (9.9%) |
2. The alert is accurate in identifying deteriorating patients. |
17 (12.2%) |
60 (43.2%) |
17 (12.2%) |
40 (28.8%) |
5 (3.6%) |
Improved Performance |
1. The alert improves my ability to formulate an effective management plan. |
27 (19.4%) |
67 (48.2%) |
14 (10.0%) |
27 (19.4%) |
4 (2.9%) |
Provider Preference |
1. The alert gives me greater confidence in providing clinical care to my patients. |
15 (10.8%) |
62 (44.6%) |
23 (16.5%) |
34 (24.5%) |
5 (3.6%) |
Physician Response |
1. Physicians give me clinical direction based on the sepsis alert. |
20 (14.1%) |
95 (66.9%) |
11 (7.7%) |
16 (11.3%) |
0 (0.0%) |
2. Physicians are receptive when I contact them regarding a sepsis alert. |
19 (13.3%) |
88 (61.5%) |
9 (6.3%) |
27 (18.9%) |
0 (0.0%) |
Domain n, (% of total) |
Yes |
Unsure |
No |
Impact on Workload |
1. The alert has impacted/changed the plan of care for a patient I was treating. |
77 (55.8%) |
21 (15.2%) |
40 (30.0%) |
Provider Preference |
1. I receive feedback regarding patients that trigger the sepsis alert. |
51 (36.7%) |
36 (25.9%) |
52 (37.4%) |
Domain n, (% of total) |
Greatly Increase |
Slightly Increase |
Same |
Slightly Decrease |
Greatly Decrease |
Impact on Workload |
12 (8.6%) |
81 (58.3%) |
39 (28%) |
4 (2.9%) |
3 (2.2%) |
Improved Performance |
11 (7.9%) |
46 (33.1%) |
76 (55%) |
5 (3.6%) |
1 (0.7%) |