Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31325354›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists2019

Stakeholder perceptions of smart infusion pumps and drug library updates: A multisite, interdisciplinary study.

Poching DeLaurentis, Todd A Walroth, Andrew C Fritschle, Denny Yu, Jee Eun Hong, Yuehwern Yih, James Fuller

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Poching DeLaurentisRegenstrief Center for Healthcare Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Todd A WalrothEskenazi Health, Indianapolis, IN.
Andrew C FritschleEskenazi Health, Indianapolis, IN.
Denny YuSchool of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Jee Eun HongSchool of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Yuehwern YihSchool of Industrial Engineering and Regenstrief Center for Healthcare Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
James FullerIndianapolis Coalition for Patient Safety, Inc., Indianapolis, IN.

Funding

Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteUL1TR001108 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$23.3M
Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteKL2TR001106 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$3.2M
Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteTL1TR001107 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$2.0M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001106NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001107NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeResults of a questionnaire-based study to evaluate smart infusion pump end users' perceptions and understanding of the drug library update process are reported.

methodsThe Indianapolis Coalition for Patient Safety, Inc., in partnership with the Regenstrief Center for Healthcare Engineering, conducted a 33-item electronic, cross-sectional survey across 5 Indiana health systems from May through November 2017. Interdisciplinary participants identified for survey distribution included nurses, pharmacists, biomedical engineers, administrators, and medication safety officers. The survey assessed the following domains: patient safety, the drug library update process, knowledge of drug libraries and the update process, and end-user perceptions.

resultsA total of 778 submitted surveys were included in the data analysis, with a large majority of responses (90.2%) provided by nurses. The use of drug libraries for ensuring patient safety was deemed extremely important or important by 88% of respondents, but 36% indicated that they were unsure of whether drug libraries are updated on a routine basis in their health system. Approximately two-thirds agreed that the current update process improves quality of care (65.0%) and patient safety (68.1%). Moreover, 53.3% agreed that the current drug library update process was effective. However, less than 10% responded correctly when asked about the steps required to update the drug library. Furthermore, only 18% correctly indicated that when a pump is on it may not necessarily contain the most up-to-date version of the drug library.

conclusionA survey of 5 health systems in Indianapolis identified several end-user knowledge gaps related to smart pump drug library updates. The results suggest that these gaps were most likely due to a combination of the 2-step update process and the fact that the current drug library version is not easy to find and/or user-friendly and it is unclear when an update is pending.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesHospitalsHumansIndianaInfusion PumpsInterdisciplinary StudiesMedication ErrorsPersonnel, HospitalSurveys and QuestionnairesWireless Technologyinfusion pumpsmedical informaticspatient safetysurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID31325354
PMCPMC6695576

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.