Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17068346›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

Practitioners' views on computerized drug-drug interaction alerts in the VA system.

Yu Ko, Jacob Abarca, Daniel C Malone, Donna C Dare, Doug Geraets, Antoun Houranieh, William N Jones, W Paul Nichol, Gregory P Schepers, Michelle Wilhardt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Computerized clinical decision support for prescribing: provision does not guarantee uptake.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Clinician collaboration to improve clinical decision support: the Clickbusters initiative.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Alert dwell time: introduction of a measure to evaluate interruptive clinical decision support alerts.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Recommendations to improve the usability of drug-drug interaction clinical decision support alerts.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Evaluation of a drug-drug interaction: fax alert intervention program.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2013
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Yu KoCollege of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Drachman B307F, 1295 N. Martin, Tucson, AZ 85721-0207, USA.
Jacob Abarca
Daniel C Malone
Donna C Dare
Doug Geraets
Antoun Houranieh
William N Jones
W Paul Nichol
Gregory P Schepers
Michelle Wilhardt

Funding

CENTER FOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH ON THERAPEUTICSU18HS010385 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI WOOSLEY, RAYMOND L · 1999 to 2006
$621k
AHRQ HHS U18 HS010385AHRQ HHS U18 HS10385-05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess Veterans Affairs (VA) prescribers' and pharmacists' opinions about computer-generated drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts and obtain suggestions for improving DDI alerts.

designA mail survey of 725 prescribers and 142 pharmacists from seven VA medical centers across the United States. MEASUREMENTS: A questionnaire asked respondents about their sources of drug and DDI information, satisfaction with the combined inpatient and outpatient computerized prescriber order entry (CPOE) system, attitude toward DDI alerts, and suggestions for improving DDI alerts.

resultsThe overall response rate was 40% (prescribers: 36%; pharmacists: 59%). Both prescribers and pharmacists indicated that the CPOE system had a neutral to positive impact on their jobs. DDI alerts were not viewed as a waste of time and the majority (61%) of prescribers felt that DDI alerts had increased their potential to prescribe safely. However, only 30% of prescribers felt DDI alerts provided them with what they needed most of the time. Both prescribers and pharmacists agreed that DDI alerts should be accompanied by management alternatives (73% and 82%, respectively) and more detailed information (65% and 89%, respectively). When asked about suggestions for improving DDI alerts, prescribers most preferred including management options whereas pharmacists most preferred making it more difficult to override lethal interactions. Prescribers and pharmacists reported primarily relying on electronic references for general drug information (62% and 55%, respectively) and DDI information (51% and 79%, respectively).

conclusionRespondents reported neutral to positive views regarding the effect of CPOE on their jobs. Their opinions suggest DDI alerts are useful but still require additional work to increase their clinical utility.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelDrug InteractionsDrug Therapy, Computer-AssistedMedical Order Entry SystemsReminder SystemsAttitude to ComputersHumansMedication ErrorsMedication Systems, Hospital

Identifiers

PMID17068346
PMCPMC2215077

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.