ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2018
Pharmacotherapeutic follow-up in a respiratory intensive care unit: description and analysis of results.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe and evaluate the pharmacotherapeutic follow-up by a clinical pharmacist in an intensive care unit.
methodsA descriptive and cross-sectional study carried out from August to October 2016. The data were collected through a form, and pharmacotherapeutic follow-up conducted by a clinical pharmacist at the respiratory intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital. The problems recorded in the prescriptions were quantified, classified and evaluated according to severity; the recommendations made by the pharmacist were analyzed considering the impact on pharmacotherapy. The medications involved in the problems were classified according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System.
resultsForty-six patients were followed up and 192 pharmacotherapy-related problems were registered. The most prevalent problems were missing information on the prescription (33.16%), and those with minor severity (37.5%). Of the recommendations made to optimize pharmacotherapy, 92.7% were accepted, particularly those on inclusion of infusion time (16.67%), and dose appropriateness (13.02%), with greater impact on toxicity (53.6%). Antimicrobials, in general, for systemic use were drug class most often related to problems in pharmacotherapy (53%).
conclusionPharmacotherapeutic follow-up conducted by a pharmacist in a respiratory intensive care unit was able to detect problems in drug therapy and to make clinically relevant recommendations.
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.