Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30446896›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2019

Medication prescribing errors: a pre- and post-computerized physician order entry retrospective study.

Naïs Rouayroux, Violaine Calmels, Bérengére Bachelet, Brigitte Sallerin, Elodie Divol

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. A systematic literature review of LASA error interventions.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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.

Naïs RouayrouxClinical Pharmacy Department, Toulouse University Hospital Centre, 1 Avenue du Professeur Jean Poulhès, 31059, Toulouse, France. nais.rouayroux@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8756-0286
Violaine CalmelsClinical Pharmacy Department, Toulouse University Hospital Centre, 1 Avenue du Professeur Jean Poulhès, 31059, Toulouse, France.
Bérengére BacheletClinical Pharmacy Department, Toulouse University Hospital Centre, 1 Avenue du Professeur Jean Poulhès, 31059, Toulouse, France.
Brigitte SallerinClinical Pharmacy Department, Toulouse University Hospital Centre, 1 Avenue du Professeur Jean Poulhès, 31059, Toulouse, France.
Elodie DivolClinical Pharmacy Department, Toulouse University Hospital Centre, 1 Avenue du Professeur Jean Poulhès, 31059, Toulouse, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background The computerization of prescriptions with a computerized physician order entry contributes to securing the error-free drug supply, but is not risk-free. Objective: To determine the impact of a computerized physician order entry system on prescribing errors immediately after its implementation and 1 year later. Setting The Cardiology and Diabetology Departments at Toulouse University Hospital, France. Method The prescriptions were analysed by pharmacists over three 30-day periods for 3 consecutive years (N: computerization period, N - 1, N + 1). For each identified error, the prescriber was informed by a pharmaceutical intervention. The pharmaceutical interventions were counted and arranged according to the classification by the French Society of Clinical Pharmacy. Their average numbers and clinical impacts were compared for each period using t-tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Main outcome measure The average numbers of pharmaceutical interventions. Results In total, 12.1 pharmaceutical interventions per 100 patient days were done during the N - 1 period, 14.1 during N and 9.6 during N + 1. Among those, 3.6 (N) and 2.1 (N + 1) were related to the computerization itself, and 10.5 (N) and 7.5 (N + 1) were not. The average number of computerization-related pharmaceutical interventions significantly decreased from N to N + 1 (p = 0.04). The average number of classic interventions decreased from N - 1 to N + 1 (p = 0.02). The clinical impacts of the computerization related errors were similar to those of other errors. Conclusion The implementation of the computerized physician order entry induced the appearance of specific computerized-related errors, but the number of classic errors decreased. The entry-system related errors were not more severe than other errors, and the number decreased after 1 year.

Indexed as

Drug PrescriptionsElectronic PrescribingFemaleHumansMaleMedical Order Entry SystemsMedication ErrorsMedication ReconciliationPharmacistsPhysiciansRetrospective StudiesClinical pharmacyComputerized physician order entryCPOEFrancePharmaceutical interventionsPrescribing errors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.