Observational studyBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2018
Evaluation of accuracy of IHI Trigger Tool in identifying adverse drug events: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Triggers for identifying anticoagulation-associated adverse drug events in hospitalized patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Pooled it
- Drug-Event Pairs as Indicators for the Detection of Adverse Drug Reactions during Hospitalization in Routinely Collected Electronic Data Sources.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
- Implementation of Electronic Triggers to Identify Diagnostic Errors in Emergency Departments.JAMA internal medicine · 2025Article
- Establishing a trigger tool based on global trigger tools to identify adverse drug events in obstetric inpatients in China.BMC health services research · 2024Review
- Active monitoring of antifungal adverse events in hospitalized patients based on Global Trigger Tool method.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Analysis of medication-related triggers to determine adverse drug events.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2023Article
- Medication-related adverse events in health care-what have we learned? A narrative overview of the current knowledge.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Review
- Validation of an electronic trigger to measure missed diagnosis of stroke in emergency departments.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Causality assessment of adverse drug reactions by applying a global introspection method in a high complexity hospital.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2021Article
- Development and Implementation of an e-Trigger Tool for Adverse Drug Events in a Swiss University Hospital.Drug, healthcare and patient safety · 2021Article
- Evaluation of accuracy of IHI Trigger Tool in identifying adverse drug events: a prospective observational study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsAdverse drug events (ADEs) can seriously compromise the safety and quality of care provided to hospitalized patients, requiring the adoption of accurate methods to monitor them. We sought to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of the triggers proposed by the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) for identifying ADEs.
methodsA prospective study was conducted in a public university hospital in 2015 with patients over the age of 18. Triggers proposed by IHI and clinical alterations suspected to be ADEs were searched daily. The number of days in which the patient was hospitalized was considered as unit of measure to evaluate the accuracy of each trigger.
resultsA total of 300 patients were included in this study. Mean age was 56.3 years (standard deviation (SD) 16.0), and 154 (51.3%) were female. The frequency of patients with ADEs was 24.7% and with at least one trigger was 53.3%. From those patients who had at least one trigger, the most frequent triggers were antiemetics (57.5%) and 'abrupt medication stop' (31.8%). The sensitivity of triggers ranged from 0.3 to 11.8% and the positive predictive value ranged from 1.2 to 27.3%. Specificity and negative predictive value were greater than 86%. Most patients identified by the presence of triggers did not have ADEs (64.4%). No triggers were identified in 40 (38.5%) ADEs.
conclusionsIHI Trigger Tool did not show good accuracy in detecting ADEs in this prospective study. The adoption of combined strategies could enhance effectiveness in identifying patient safety flaws. Further discussion might contribute to improve trigger usefulness in clinical practice.
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.