Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29187185›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

In-hospital prescription changes and documentation in the medical records of the primary care provider: results from a medical record review study.

Judith M Poldervaart, Marije A van Melle, Sanne Willemse, Niek J de Wit, Dorien L M Zwart

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Judith M PoldervaartJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Str. 6.101, PO box 85500, 3508AB, Utrecht, the Netherlands. j.poldervaart@umcutrecht.nl.
Marije A van MelleJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Str. 6.101, PO box 85500, 3508AB, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Sanne WillemseUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Niek J de WitJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Str. 6.101, PO box 85500, 3508AB, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Dorien L M ZwartJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Str. 6.101, PO box 85500, 3508AB, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

Achmea Z415Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport 320698
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn increasing number of transitions due to substitution of care of more complex patients urges insight in and improvement of transitional medication safety. While lack of documentation of prescription changes and/or lack of information exchange between settings likely cause adverse drug events, frequency of occurrence of these causes is not clear. Therefore, we aimed at determining the frequency of in-hospital patients’ prescription changes that are not or incorrectly documented in their primary care provider’s (PCP) medical record.

methodsA medical record review study was performed in a database linking patients’ medical records of hospital and PCP. A random sample (n = 600) was drawn from all 1399 patients who were registered at a participating primary care practice as well as the gastroenterology or cardiology department in 2013 of the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands. Outcomes were the number of in-hospital prescription changes that was not or incorrectly documented in the medical record of the PCP, and timeliness of documentation.

resultsRecords of 390 patients included one or more primary-secondary care transitions; in total we identified 1511 transitions. During these transitions, 408 in-hospital prescription changes were made, of which 31% was not or incorrectly documented in the medical record of the PCP within the next 3 months. In case changes were documented, the median number of days between hospital visit and documentation was 3 (IQR 0–18).

conclusionsOne third of in-hospital prescription changes was not or incorrectly documented in the PCP’s record, which likely puts patients at risk of adverse drug events after hospital visits. Such flawed reliability of a routine care process is unacceptable and warrants improvement and close monitoring.

Indexed as

InpatientsMedical RecordsMedication Therapy ManagementPharmacy Service, HospitalPrimary Health CareAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMedical AuditMiddle AgedNetherlandsReproducibility of ResultsContinuity of careMedical recordPatient safetyPrescription changesPrimary careSecondary careTransitional care

Identifiers

PMID29187185
PMCPMC5707815

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.