Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21214293›Full record

ArticleClinical drug investigation2011

Evaluation of stat orders in a teaching hospital: a chart review.

Fanak Fahimi, Zahra Sahraee, Shahideh Amini

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Fanak FahimiClinical Pharmacy Department, School of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, and Pharmaceutical Care Department, Chronic Respiratory Disease Research Center, NRILTD, Masih Daneshvari Hospital, Tehran, Iran. fanakfahimi@yahoo.com
Zahra Sahraee
Shahideh Amini
Masih Daneshvari Hospital · IRShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRTehran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysicians frequently prescribe 'stat' orders that need to be actioned immediately or within a limited time frame. This process can be time consuming and expensive. Stat medications are reserved for the highest priority orders and life-threatening situations that need to be dealt with immediately or within a limited time frame.

objectivesThe goals of this study were to evaluate whether stat medications in a teaching hospital were ordered appropriately and to assess the rationale for the stat order.

methodsThe study was carried out between July and August 2009 in Masih Daneshvari Hospital. All newly admitted patients' charts were reviewed and the records of all inpatients who received at least one stat order were included in the study. Detailed analyses were undertaken to examine the stat use of agents and the rationale for their prescription. Several different guidelines were used to evaluate the rationale for the prescriptions.

resultsCharts for 175 patients were reviewed. Of these, 109 (62.3%) patients received a total of 220 stat orders. The mean number of stat orders on each chart of patients who received stat orders was 2.0. Stat orders were divided into two categories: 146 (66.4%) that were administered only once and 74 (33.6%) that were reordered. The internal medicine ward accounted for the most stat medications (35%). The major reasons for stat medication orders were: prophylaxis or management of emesis (22.3%), control of dyspnoea (15.9%), preoperative medications (8.2%) and treatment of exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (7.2%). Hydrocortisone (14.1%), dexamethasone (11.3%), granisetron (9.5%), ceftriaxone (8.6%) and morphine (6.8%) accounted for the most common stat orders. Analysis showed that 133 of the total 220 stat orders (60.5%) were prescribed appropriately; the rationale for 19 orders (8.6%) could not be evaluated.

conclusionThis study showed that most stat orders at Masih Daneshvari Hospital during the study period were prescribed appropriately. Further investigations are recommended to evaluate the outcomes of unnecessary stat orders with respect to adverse drug events.

Indexed as

Medication Systems, HospitalAdultAgedDrug PrescriptionsHospitals, TeachingHumansMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID21214293
OpenAlexW105970771

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.