Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27449956›Full record

Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2016

Reducing co-administration of proton pump inhibitors and antibiotics using a computerized order entry alert and prospective audit and feedback.

Christopher E Kandel, Suzanne Gill, Janine McCready, John Matelski, Jeff E Powis

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Proton-pump inhibitors: understanding the complications and risks.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2017
    Review
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Christopher E KandelDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, M5S 1A8, Canada.
Suzanne GillPharmacy Department, Toronto East General Hospital, Toronto, M4C 3E7, Canada.
Janine McCreadyDivision of Infectious Diseases, Toronto East General Hospital, 825 Coxwell Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4C 3E7, Canada.
John MatelskiDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, M5G 2C4, Canada.
Jeff E PowisDivision of Infectious Diseases, Toronto East General Hospital, 825 Coxwell Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4C 3E7, Canada. jpowi@tegh.on.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntibiotics and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are associated with Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). Both a computer order entry alert to highlight this association as well as antimicrobial stewardship directed prospective audit and feedback represent novel interventions to reduce the co-administration of antibiotics and PPIs among hospitalized patients.

methodsConsecutive patients admitted to two General Internal Medicine wards from October 1, 2010 until March 31, 2013 at a teaching hospital in Toronto, Ontario, Canada were evaluated. The baseline observation period was followed by the first phase, which involved the creation of a computerized order entry alert that was triggered when either a PPI or an antibiotic was ordered in the presence of the other. The second phase consisted of the introduction of an antibiotic stewardship-initiated prospective audit and feedback strategy. The primary outcome was the co-administration of antibiotics and PPIs during each phase.

resultsThis alert led to a significant reduction in the co-administration of antibiotics and PPIs adjusted for month and secular trends, expressed as days of therapy per 100 patient days (4.99 vs. 3.14, p < 0.001) The subsequent introduction of the antibiotic stewardship program further reduced the co-administration (3.14 vs. 1.80, p <0.001). No change was observed in adjusted monthly CDI rates per 100 patient care days between the baseline and alert cohorts (0.12 vs. 0.12, p = 0.99) or the baseline and antibiotic stewardship phases (0.12 vs. 0.13, p = 0.97).

conclusionsDecreasing the co-administration of PPIs and antibiotics can be achieved using a simple automatic alert followed by prospective audit and feedback.

Indexed as

Clinical AuditDecision Support Systems, ClinicalMedical Order Entry SystemsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsCanadaFemaleHospitalizationHospitals, TeachingHumansInappropriate PrescribingMaleMiddle AgedOntarioAnti-Bacterial AgentsProton Pump InhibitorsAntibiotic stewardshipClostridium difficile infectionComputerized alertsProspective audit and feedbackProton pump inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID27449956
PMCPMC4957393

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.