Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24808673›Full record

ArticleJournal of basic and clinical pharmacy2013

An interventional study on intensive care unit drug therapy assessment in a rural district hospital in India.

Priyanka Tejashwani Pichala, Bharani Mukkillapati Kumar, Seeba Zachariah, Dixon Thomas, Laura Saunchez, Alvarez-Uria Gerardo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of basic and clinical pharmacy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Priyanka Tejashwani PichalaDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Raghavendra Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Bharani Mukkillapati KumarDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Raghavendra Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Seeba ZachariahDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Raghavendra Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Dixon ThomasDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Raghavendra Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Laura SaunchezIntensive Care Unit, Rural Development Trust Hospital, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Alvarez-Uria GerardoDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Rural Development Trust Hospital, Bathalapalli, Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Medical Trust Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntensive care unit is a potential area for drug-related problems. As many of the patients treated are complex patients, clinical pharmacy intervention could find drug therapy problems. MATERIALS AND

methodsDrug information liaisons daily attended ward rounds with intensivists and screened the patient for drug therapy assessment using the American Society for Health-System Pharmacists clinical skills competition DTA format. This was a prospective study done for 6 months from August 2012 to January 2013. Simple statistics were used to tabulate the drug-related problems assessed.

resultsA total of 72 patients were screened for drug therapy problems, for which 947 drug doses were prescribed in the study period. The total number of prescriptions was 148. The average number of drugs per prescription was 6.39 and the average number of drugs per patient was 13.15. A total of 243 problems were identified; on an average, 1.67 problems were present per prescription. The total number of drug interactions identified was N = 192 (78.2%); majority of them (61.4%) were of type C (not serious). So, 55.73% of them were monitored and not stopped or substituted. The second type of problem was a correlation between drug therapy and medical problem (7.4%). Appropriate drug selection and drug regimen was the third problem, and the adverse drug reactions and therapeutic duplications accounted for approximately 2% of the drug-related problems identified.

conclusionDrug interactions constituted the major problem of ICUs, but not many were serious or significant. Consensus in assessment of drug-related problems and convincing intensivists with good quality evidences are required for better acceptance of interventions.

Indexed as

Clinical pharmacy interventionsdrug therapy assessmentintensive care unitward round

Identifiers

PMID24808673
PMCPMC3979274
OpenAlexW2006679603

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.