ArticleCanadian medical education journal2017
Can a two-hour lecture by a pharmacist improve the quality of prescriptions in a pediatric hospital? A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Canadian medical education journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA high rate of prescription errors exists in pediatric teaching hospitals, especially during initial training.
objectivesTo determine the effectiveness of a two-hour lecture by a pharmacist on rates of prescription errors and quality of prescriptions.
methodsA two-hour lecture led by a pharmacist was provided to 11 junior pediatric residents (PGY-1) as part of a one-month immersion program. A control group included 15 residents without the intervention. We reviewed charts to analyze the first 50 prescriptions of each resident.
resultsData were collected from 1300 prescriptions involving 451 patients, 550 in the intervention group and 750 in the control group. The rate of prescription errors in the intervention group was 9.6% compared to 11.3% in the control group (p=0.32), affecting 106 patients. Statistically significant differences between both groups were prescriptions with unwritten doses (p=0.01) and errors involving overdosing (p=0.04). We identified many errors as well as issues surrounding quality of prescriptions.
conclusionWe found a 10.6% prescription error rate. This two-hour lecture seems insufficient to reduce prescription errors among junior pediatric residents. This study highlights the most frequent types of errors and prescription quality issues that should be targeted by future educational interventions.
Identifiers
29354193PMC5766214W2614879673What 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.