ArticleDrug safety2013
Use of an on-demand drug-drug interaction checker by prescribers and consultants: a retrospective analysis in a Swiss teaching hospital.
Article in Drug safety, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of electronic reminders on venous thromboprophylaxis after admissions and transfers.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2014Trial
- Does DDI-Predictor Help Pharmacists to Detect Drug-Drug Interactions and Resolve Medication Issues More Effectively?Metabolites · 2021Article
- Quality of Decision Support in Computerized Provider Order Entry: Systematic Literature Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2018Review
- Pharmacogenomics-Based Point-of-Care Clinical Decision Support Significantly Alters Drug Prescribing.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2017Article
- Developing strategies for predicting hyperkalemia in potassium-increasing drug-drug interactions.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017Article
- Provider variation in responses to warnings: do the same providers run stop signs repeatedly?Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016Article
- Patient- and physician-related risk factors for hyperkalaemia in potassium-increasing drug-drug interactions.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2014Article
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
backgroundOffering a drug-drug interaction (DDI) checker on-demand instead of computer-triggered alerts is a strategy to avoid alert fatigue.
objectiveThe purpose was to determine the use of such an on-demand tool, implemented in the clinical information system for inpatients.
methodsThe study was conducted at the University Hospital Zurich, an 850-bed teaching hospital. The hospital-wide use of the on-demand DDI checker was measured for prescribers and consulting pharmacologists. The number of DDIs identified on-demand was compared to the number that would have resulted by computer-triggering and this was compared to patient-specific recommendations by a consulting pharmacist.
resultsThe on-demand use was analyzed during treatment of 64,259 inpatients with 1,316,884 prescriptions. The DDI checker was popular with nine consulting pharmacologists (648 checks/consultant). A total of 644 prescribing physicians used it infrequently (eight checks/prescriber). Among prescribers, internists used the tool most frequently and obtained higher numbers of DDIs per check (1.7) compared to surgeons (0.4). A total of 16,553 DDIs were identified on-demand, i.e., <10 % of the number the computer would have triggered (169,192). A pharmacist visiting 922 patients on a medical ward recommended 128 adjustments to prevent DDIs (0.14 recommendations/patient), and 76 % of them were applied by prescribers. In contrast, computer-triggering the DDI checker would have resulted in 45 times more alerts on this ward (6.3 alerts/patient).
conclusionsThe on-demand DDI checker was popular with the consultants only. However, prescribers accepted 76 % of patient-specific recommendations by a pharmacist. The prescribers' limited on-demand use indicates the necessity for developing improved safety concepts, tailored to suit these consumers. Thus, different approaches have to satisfy different target groups.
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.