Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25511564›Full record

Observational studyBMC nephrology2014

Understanding physicians' behavior toward alerts about nephrotoxic medications in outpatients: a cross-sectional analysis.

Insook Cho, Sarah P Slight, Karen C Nanji, Diane L Seger, Nivethietha Maniam, Patricia C Dykes, David W Bates

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC nephrology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Medication-related clinical decision support alert overrides in inpatients.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Insook ChoThe Center for Patient Safety Research and Practice, Division of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. insook.cho@inha.ac.kr.
Sarah P Slight
Karen C Nanji
Diane L Seger
Nivethietha Maniam
Patricia C Dykes
David W Bates
National Patient Safety Foundation · USMass General Brigham · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USMassachusetts General Hospital · US

Funding

Health Information Technology Center for Education and Research on Therapeutics *U19HS021094 · AHRQ · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI BATES, DAVID W., MD,MSC · 2011 to 2015
$4.1M
AHRQ HHS U19 HS021094AHRQ HHS U19HS021094
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough most outpatients are relatively healthy, many have chronic renal insufficiency, and high override rates for suggestions on renal dosing have been observed. To better understand the override of renal dosing alerts in an outpatient setting, we conducted a study to evaluate which patients were more frequently prescribed contraindicated medications, to assess providers' responses to suggestions, and to examine the drugs involved and the reasons for overrides.

methodsWe obtained data on renal alert overrides and the coded reasons for overrides cited by providers at the time of prescription from outpatient clinics and ambulatory hospital-based practices at a large academic health care center over a period of 3 years, from January 2009 to December 2011. For detailed chart review, a group of 6 trained clinicians developed the appropriateness criteria with excellent inter-rater reliability (κ=0.93). We stratified providers by override frequency and then drew samples from the high- and low-frequency groups. We measured the rate of total overrides, rate of appropriate overrides, medications overridden, and the reason(s) for override.

resultsA total of 4120 renal alerts were triggered by 584 prescribers in the study period, among which 78.2% (3,221) were overridden. Almost half of the alerts were triggered by 40 providers and one-third was triggered by high-frequency overriders. The appropriateness rates were fairly similar, at 28.4% and 31.6% for high- and low-frequency overriders, respectively. Metformin, glyburide, hydrochlorothiazide, and nitrofurantoin were the most common drugs overridden. Physicians' appropriateness rates were higher than the rates for nurse practitioners (32.9% vs. 22.1%). Physicians with low frequency override rates had higher levels of appropriateness for metformin than the high frequency overriders (P=0.005).

conclusionA small number of providers accounted for a large fraction of overrides, as was the case with a small number of drugs. These data suggest that a focused intervention targeting primarily these providers and medications has the potential to improve medication safety.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareAttitude of Health PersonnelDecision Support Systems, ClinicalDrug Therapy, Computer-AssistedMedical Order Entry SystemsCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMedication ErrorsNurse PractitionersPhysiciansRenal Insufficiency, Chronic

Identifiers

PMID25511564
PMCPMC4279964
OpenAlexW2131563119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.