ArticleThe Permanente journal2020
Effectiveness of Best Practice Alerts for Potentially Inappropriate Medication Orders in Older Adults in the Ambulatory Setting.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of the consolidated framework for implementation research in a mixed methods evaluation of the EQUIPPED medication safety program in four academic health system emergency departments.Frontiers in health services · 2022Article
- Inappropriate medications and physical function: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInformation is limited about the effectiveness of best practice alerts (BPAs) for potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in improving clinical outcomes in older adults.
objectiveTo assess clinical outcomes of 11 BPAs for PIMs in older adults in the ambulatory setting.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted at an integrated health care delivery system with computerized provider order entry. Patients aged 65 years and older were included if they had a BPA triggered when a prescriber attempted to order a sedating PIM in the ambulatory setting. Patients were categorized into dispensed and nondispensed groups if they did and did not, respectively, have the study PIM for which the BPA was triggered dispensed within 30 days of the alert. Rates of fall, fracture, or other injury and cognitive impairment were measured during 180-day follow-up.
resultsA total of 2704 patients were included: 1373 (50.8%) and 1331 (49.2%) in the dispensed and nondispensed groups, respectively. The dispensed group had a lower unadjusted rate of fall/fracture/injury (3.4% vs 5.3%, p = 0.019), but this difference was attenuated with multivariable adjustment (adjusted odds ratio = 0.77, 95% confidence interval = 0.51-1.13). There was no difference in the rate of cognitive impairment between groups (4.6% vs 4.4%, adjusted odds ratio = 1.40, 95% confidence interval = 0.95-2.05).
conclusionNo association was identified between PIM dispensing after a prescriber was alerted with a BPA and reduced rates of falls/fractures/injuries and cognitive impairment.
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.