Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27081411›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2016

Electronic Prescribing and Medication Management at a Residential Aged Care Facility: Uptake by General Practitioners and Qualitative Evaluation of the Benefits and Barriers.

Rohan A Elliott, Cik Yin Lee, Safeera Y Hussainy

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2016. 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
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. E-prescribing and medication safety in community settings: A rapid scoping review.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2023
    Article
  7. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rohan A ElliottMonash University, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety , Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Cik Yin LeeMonash University, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Royal District Nursing Service Institute, St Kilda, Victoria, Australia.
Safeera Y HussainyMonash University, Centre for Medicine Use and Safety , Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Monash University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA cloud-based mobile electronic prescribing and medication management system (ePMMS), in which prescribers' orders directly populate residential aged care facility (RACF) medication administration records (MARs) and are communicated electronically to the RACF's pharmacy, may create efficiencies and improve patient safety when compared to the paper-based and hybrid paper-electronic medication management systems used in most Australian RACFs. Little is known about general-practitioners' (GPs'), nurses' and pharmacists' acceptance of, or experiences with, ePMMS.

objectivesTo explore the uptake of an ePMMS by GPs, and the experiences and perceptions of GPs, nurses and pharmacists, at a 90-bed RACF that tested a beta-version ePMMS.

methodsRetrospective audit to determine the proportion of medicines ordered by GPs via the ePMMS over a three-month period. Focus groups conducted three-to-four months after implementation: one with GPs (n=5), one with nurses (n=12); in-depth interview/survey of pharmacists (n=2). Qualitative data were analysed thematically.

resultsThree of seven GPs used the ePMMS to order medicines; 53/205(25.9%) medicines were ordered via the ePMMS by GPs. Two broad themes were identified: benefits of the ePMMS, and barriers/limitations. Benefits related to patient safety and workforce efficiency, and included GPs' ability to access and modify residents' MARs remotely, no need for nurses to fax orders to the pharmacy, and no need for pharmacy transcription of GPs' handwritten orders to create electronic MARs. Barriers and limitations related to inefficiency, low GP uptake and training/support, and included slower prescribing compared to written orders, the need for GP-signed paper copies of the MAR, lack of integration with GP clinic software, and low GP motivation to use the system, especially GPs with few patients at the RACF.

conclusionsGPs, nurses and pharmacists felt the ePMMS improved medication-safety and workforce-efficiency, however a number of barriers were identified that contributed to low GP-uptake and limited the benefits.

Indexed as

AgedElectronic PrescribingGeneral PractitionersHumansPatient SafetyPharmacistsResidential FacilitiesAustraliaElectronic prescribinggeneral practitionersresidential facilities

Identifiers

PMID27081411
PMCPMC4817339
OpenAlexW2326314193

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.