ArticlePharmacy world & science : PWS1999
The quality of Dutch hospital drug formularies: evaluation of technical features and organisational information.
Article in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dutch hospital drug formularies: pharmacotherapeutic variation and conservatism, but concurrence with national pharmacotherapeutic guidelines.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2000Article
- Drug and Therapeutics (D & T) committees in Dutch hospitals: a nation-wide survey of structure, activities, and drug selection procedures.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 1999Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHospital drug formularies (HDFs) are widely used tools to help influence clinicians' prescribing behaviour. Besides the therapeutic quality of HDFs, the available information and the way in which this is presented are key factors in HDFs' success or failure to influence prescribing behaviour and enhance prescribing quality. This research evaluates the technical features and organisational information of Dutch HDFs.
methodsSeventy-two (75%) of all Dutch HDFs were evaluated based on criteria retrieved from international literature and additional criteria drafted by occupational groups working with HDFs. Aspects that were studied were physical appearance and layout, practicability with respect to the available information and how easily this could be retrieved from the HDFs, information regarding drug choice policies such as seamless care, and the available type of therapeutic and pharmaceutical information.
resultsThirty-three (46%) of the HDFs were less than 3 years old. Physical appearance of all HDFs was very well looked after. Two (3%) HDFs were disease-oriented rather than drug-oriented. Changes from pre-admission therapy were addressed in 30 (42%) of the HDFs, but other seamless care policies were addressed in less than 20% of the HDFs. Finally, less than 50% provided therapeutic information that clinicians indicated as important. DISCUSSION: Although Dutch HDFs are technically practicable with respect to user-convenience, practice-oriented features are capable of improvements. Furthermore, Dutch HDFs lack important clinical information for daily practice. To enhance seamless care across healthcare, generic prescribing and prescribing on admission from and discharge to any other sectors should be addressed more specifically.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10427581What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.