Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31156881›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2016

A collaborative evaluation of pharmacy interventions in the care of inpatients in community hospitals.

Tracy Rogers, Carina Livingstone, Jane Nicholls, Sandra Wolper

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Tracy RogersNHS Specialist Pharmacy Service, London, UK.
Carina LivingstoneNHS Specialist Pharmacy Service, London, UK.
Jane NichollsNHS Specialist Pharmacy Service, London, UK.
Sandra WolperNHS Specialist Pharmacy Service, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo quantify medication-related errors, in particular prescribing errors, identified by pharmacists and assess their potential impact on inpatients in community hospitals.

methodsPharmacists recorded all interventions to optimise medication for community hospital inpatients over 14 days in November 2013. Interventions were subsequently classified by type (prescribing error; omitted or delayed drug administration; or attributable to other issues) and rated for potential clinical impact.

results15 organisations participated in the study reporting on 4077 medication charts. In total, 52 033 medication orders were screened by pharmacists. A medication-related intervention was made on 1 in 3 charts for one or more medications. A total of 2782 interventions were recorded. The majority were categorised as a prescriber error (67%, 1872/2782). The remainder (33%, 910/2782) were not directly attributable to prescriber error; of these omitted and delayed medicine administration accounted for 11% (298/2782). Of the 1872 interventions classed as prescriber error, a third, if left undetected, might have caused moderate or severe patient harm. The prescribing error rate was 3.6 errors per 100 medication orders.

conclusionsPharmacists reported intervening to improve the care provided to over a third of patients in this study. Two-thirds of interventions were in response to prescribing errors, a third of which, if left undetected, could have led to harm. The results suggest that inpatients in community hospitals are subject to prescribing errors at a rate comparable to those seen in acute and mental health hospitals. A clinical pharmacy service is vital to ensure patient safety in community hospitals.

Indexed as

CLINICAL PHARMACYHospitals, CommunityInpatientsMedication ErrorsPharmacistsPrescriptions

Identifiers

PMID31156881
PMCPMC6451516

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.