ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2013
Adherence to hospital drug formularies and cost of drugs in hospitals in Denmark.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do educational meetings and group detailing change adherence to drug formularies in hospitals? A cluster randomized controlled trial.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2014Trial
- Impact of a change of bronchodilator medications in a hospital drug formulary on intra- and out-of-hospital drug prescriptions: interrupted time series design with comparison group.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
- The Effects of County Public Hospital Reform on the Consumption and Costs of Antibiotics: Evidence from a Quasinatural Experiment in Jiangsu, China.BioMed research international · 2020Article
- Impact of removal and restriction of me-too medicines in a hospital drug formulary on in- and outpatient drug prescriptions: interrupted time series design with comparison group.Implementation science : IS · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate adherence rates to hospital drug formularies (HDFs) and cost of drugs in hospitals.
methodsData on drugs used during 2010 were analyzed for ten hospitals (two hospitals from each of the five regions), constituting 30 % of hospitals and 45 % of hospital beds in Denmark. Drug use data from individual hospitals were retrieved from the hospital pharmacies. Adherence to the HDFs was analyzed for selected substances characterised by extensive use both in primary and secondary sectors (ATC codes A10, B03, C03, C07, C08, C09, C10, J01, N02, N05 and R03). Within each group, we also identified the drugs constituting 90 % of the volume (= DU90%) and the adherence to the HDF in this segment (Index of Adherence).
resultsSubstances used by hospitals varied between 598 and 1,093. The proportion of used substances that were on the HDF varied between 14 % and 44 %. University hospitals used a significantly higher total number of substances (median 165 vs. 139, p = 0.019) and cost/DDD [(median 5 vs. 2 Euros, p = 0.033), p = 0.033] in the DU90% segment than the regional hospitals. Index of adherence varied between 43 % and 91 %. For the selected ATC codes, the index of adherence was between 76 % and 100 %.
conclusionsAdherence to the selected ATC groups was high, which means that the most commonly used substances are included in the HDFs, even though a variation existed. A large variation existed between the hospitals in the number of substances at HDFs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23765410What 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.