I'm building a clinical monitoring and alerting system and wanted your opinion as a physician.

The system creates a patient encounter when a patient is admitted. Vitals and lab results are continuously recorded against that encounter from monitors, nursing observations, and laboratory systems.

Each observation is evaluated against configurable clinical thresholds. Critical abnormalities generate immediate alerts. The system also evaluates SIRS criteria (temperature, heart rate, respiratory rate, and WBC count) over a rolling time window to identify possible early sepsis and generate warning alerts.

Alerts have a lifecycle: open, acknowledged, resolved, or escalated. If a critical alert is not acknowledged within a defined period, it is automatically escalated to an on-call backup clinician.

The system maintains a complete timeline of observations, alerts, and clinical events, provides trend analysis and population-level reporting, and performs safety checks such as identifying patients with no recent observations or critical alerts that remain unaddressed.

I'm trying to understand whether this would provide meaningful clinical value in a real hospital environment.

From your perspective:

Would this improve patient care or clinical outcomes?
Which features would be genuinely useful versus "nice to have"?
Would the sepsis detection approach be clinically meaningful or create excessive false alarms?
What clinical deterioration indicators would you want monitored that aren't included here?
How would this compare to the monitoring and alerting systems you currently use?
What would prevent physicians from trusting or adopting a system like this?

I'm less interested in whether the technology is impressive and more interested in whether it solves a real clinical problem.