ArticleSurgical endoscopy2008
Intravenous pantoprazole utilization in a level 1 trauma center.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years there has been a rapid increase in the use of proton pump inhibitors. Our institution has recently had several shortages of IV pantoprazole, each lasting 7-10 days. The purpose of our study was to evaluate in-patient usage of IV pantoprazole. We hypothesized that hospitalized patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) or risk for stress ulcers inappropriately received IV pantoprazole based on current literature.
methodsThis was a retrospective study of 165 consecutive in-patients identified as receiving pantoprazole from December 2004 to March 2005. Only patients receiving IV pantoprazole were included (n = 78). Data collected included demographics, indication and dosing of pantoprazole, admitting team (surgery vs. medicine), and risk factors for stress ulcers.
resultsOur study population had a mean age of 54 +/- 17 years and 62% were male. Overall, 45% (35/78) of patients receiving IV pantoprazole had an appropriate indication, and 19% (15/78) received the correct dose. Of the 78 patients, 43 (55%) were treated with pantoprazole for stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP), and 35 (45%) patients were treated for GIB. We found that none of the 43 patients treated for SUP had an appropriate indication for pantoprazole, but all of the patients with GIB (35) had an appropriate indication. Of the 35 patients treated for GIB with pantoprazole, only 40% (14/35) received the correct dose. In all cases of incorrect dosing, the patients were underdosed.
conclusionsPantoprazole is not being prescribed appropriately for stress ulcer prophylaxis in our patient population. Even in patients appropriately receiving pantoprazole the majority were prescribed an incorrect dose. Appropriate indications and dosing of pantoprazole could eliminate the shortages seen at our institution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.