Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25589905›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2014

A survey of nursing home physicians to determine laboratory monitoring adverse drug event alert preferences.

R D Boyce, S Perera, D A Nace, C M Culley, S M Handler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

R D BoyceDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA ; Center for Pharmaceutical Policy and Prescribing, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA ; Geriatric Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Geroinformatics Research & Training Program, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA.
S PereraDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA ; Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA.
D A NaceDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA.
C M CulleyDepartment of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, School of Pharmacy, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA.
S M HandlerDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA ; Center for Pharmaceutical Policy and Prescribing, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA ; Geriatric Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Geroinformatics Research & Training Program, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA ; Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh , Pittsburgh, PA ; Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System (VAPHS) , Pittsburgh, PA ; Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion (CHERP), VAPHS , Pittsburgh, PA.

Funding

University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000005 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2012 to 2015
$50.8M
VARIABILITY, STABILITY & SMOOTHNESS OF WALKINGP30AG024827 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI JENNIFER S BRACH · 2004 to 2026
$28.6M
University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstitutionKL2RR024154 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2006 to 2011
$22.2M
University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstitutionKL2TR000146 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2012 to 2015
$8.7M
Enhancing the Detection and Management of Adverse Drug Events in the Nursing HomeR01HS018721 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI HANDLER, STEVEN MARK · 2010 to 2013
$2.0M
The University of Pittsburgh's Comparative Effectiveness Research Scholars PrograK12HS019461 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI KAPOOR, WISHWA N · 2010 to 2010
$1.9M
Addressing gaps in clinically useful evidence on drug-drug interactionsR01LM011838 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BOYCE, RICHARD DAVID · 2014 to 2017
$1.6M
Longitudinal Impact of CNS Polypharmacy on Geriatric SyndromesR01AG027017 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI HANLON, JOSEPH T · 2006 to 2012
$801k
UPITT Program for Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research in AgingK07AG033174 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI HANLON, JOSEPH T · 2009 to 2013
$461k
Improving medication safety for nursing home residents prescribed psychotropic drK01AG044433 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI BOYCE, RICHARD DAVID · 2014 to 2016
$342k
AHRQ HHS K12 HS019461AHRQ HHS K12HS019461AHRQ HHS R01 HS018721AHRQ HHS R01HS018721NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000146NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000005NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR024154NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR024154-01NIA NIH HHS K01 AG044433NIA NIH HHS K01AG044433NIA NIH HHS K07 AG033174NIA NIH HHS K07AG033174NIA NIH HHS P30 AG024827NIA NIH HHS P30AG024827NIA NIH HHS R01 AG027017NIA NIH HHS R01AG027017NLM NIH HHS R01 LM011838
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe conducted a survey of nursing home physicians to learn about (1) the laboratory value thresholds that clinical event monitors should use to generate alerts about potential adverse drug events (ADEs); (2) the specific information to be included in the alerts; and (3) the communication modality that should be used for communicating them.

methodsNursing home physician attendees of the 2010 Conference of AMDA: The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine.

resultsA total of 800 surveys were distributed; 565 completed surveys were returned and seven surveys were excluded due to inability to verify that the respondents were physicians (a 70% net valid response rate). Alerting threshold preferences were identified for eight laboratory tests. For example, the majority of respondents selected thresholds of ≥5.5 mEq/L for hyperkalemia (63%) and ≤3.5 without symptoms for hypokalemia (54%). The majority of surveyed physicians thought alerts should include the complete active medication list, current vital signs, previous value of the triggering lab, medication change in the past 30 days, and medication allergies. Most surveyed physicians felt the best way to communicate an ADE alert was by direct phone/voice communication (64%), followed by email to a mobile device (59%).

conclusionsThis survey of nursing home physicians suggests that the majority prefer alerting thresholds that would generally lead to fewer alerts than if widely accepted standardized laboratory ranges were used. It also suggests a subset of information items to include in alerts, and the physicians' preferred communication modalities. This information might improve the acceptance of clinical event monitoring systems to detect ADEs in the nursing home setting.

Indexed as

Data CollectionDecision Support Systems, ClinicalLaboratoriesNursing HomesPhysiciansAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsCommunicationHumansReference Valuesadverse drug eventclinical decision support systemsNursing homestherapeutic drug monitoring

Identifiers

PMID25589905
PMCPMC4287669

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.