ArticleSpringerPlus2016
The support of medication reviews in hospitalised patients using a clinical decision support system.
Article in SpringerPlus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Diagnostic Recommendations Embedded in Medication Alerts: Prospective Single-Arm Interventional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Characterization of children's prospective prescription review and exploration of factors influencing the success of interventions.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2025Article
- Clinical decision support system supported interventions in hospitalized older patients: a matter of natural course and adequate timing.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Appropriate medication use in Dutch terminal care: study protocol of a multicentre stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (the AMUSE study).BMC palliative care · 2024Article
- Clinical Decision Support Systems in Hospitalized Older Patients: An Exploratory Analysis in a Real-Life Clinical Setting.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2023Article
- Clinical validation of clinical decision support systems for medication review: A scoping review.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Article
- Control in the Hospital by Extensive Clinical rules for Unplanned hospitalizations in older Patients (CHECkUP); study design of a multicentre randomized study.BMC geriatrics · 2022Article
- Medication-related hospital admissions and readmissions in older patients: an overview of literature.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2020Review
- Mediating role of the perceived benefits of using a medication safety system in the relationship between transformational leadership and the medication-error management climate.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2020Article
- Canonical correlations between individual self-efficacy/organizational bottom-up approach and perceived barriers to reporting medication errors: a multicenter study.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Development and implementation of "Check of Medication Appropriateness" (CMA): advanced pharmacotherapy-related clinical rules to support medication surveillance.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Observational
- Are patients with a nasally placed feeding tube at risk of potential drug-drug interactions? A multicentre cross-sectional study.PloS one · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesFirst, to estimate the added value of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) in the performance of medication reviews in hospitalised elderly. Second, to identify the limitations of the current CDSS by analysing generated drug-related problems (DRPs).
methodsMedication reviews were performed in patients admitted to the geriatric ward of the Zuyderland medical centre. Additionally, electronically available patient information was introduced into a CDSS. The DRP notifications generated by the CDSS were compared with those found in the medication review. The DRP notifications were analysed to learn how to improve the CDSS.
resultsA total of 223 DRP strategies were identified during the medication reviews. The CDSS generated 70 clinically relevant DRP notifications. Of these DRP notifications, 63 % (44) were also found during the medication reviews. The CDSS generated 10 % (26) new DRP notifications and conveyed 28 % (70) of all 249 clinically relevant DRPs that were found. Classification of the CDSS generated DRP notifications related to 'medication error type' revealed that 'contraindications/interactions/side effects' and 'indication without medication' were the main categories not identified during the manual medication review. The error types 'medication without indication', 'double medication', and 'wrong medication' were mostly not identified by the CDSS.
conclusionsThe CDSS used in this study is not yet sufficiently advanced to replace the manual medication review, though it does add value to the manual medication review. The strengths and weaknesses of the current CDSS can be determined according to the medication error types.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.