Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32026348›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2020

Physicians' acceptance of pharmacists' interventions in daily hospital practice.

Rianne J Zaal, Edwin W den Haak, Elrozy R Andrinopoulou, Teun van Gelder, Arnold G Vulto, Patricia M L A van den Bemt

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Examining clinical pharmacist interventions and identifying opioid medication-related issues in patients with cancer.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2025
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Rianne J ZaalDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. r.zaal@erasmusmc.nl.
Edwin W den HaakUtrecht University, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Elrozy R AndrinopoulouDepartment of Biostatistics, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Teun van GelderDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Arnold G VultoDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Patricia M L A van den BemtDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background The physicians' acceptance rate of pharmacists' interventions to improve pharmacotherapy can vary depending on the setting. The acceptance rate of interventions proposed by pharmacists located in the hospital pharmacy over the telephone and factors associated with acceptance are largely unknown. Objective To determine the physicians' acceptance rate of pharmacists' interventions proposed over the telephone in daily hospital practice and to identify factors associated with acceptance. Setting A retrospective case-control study was performed concerning adult patients admitted to a university hospital in the Netherlands. Method Pharmacists' interventions, based on alerts for drug-drug interactions and drug dosing in patients with renal impairment, recorded between January 2012 and June 2013 that were communicated over the telephone were included. Factors associated with physicians' acceptance were identified with the use of a mixed-effects logistic model. Main outcome measure The primary outcome was the proportion of accepted interventions. Results A total of 841 interventions were included. Physicians accepted 599 interventions, resulting in an acceptance rate of 71.2%. The mixed-effects logistic model showed that acceptance was significantly associated with the number of prescribed drugs (16 to ≤ 20 drugs OR

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelProfessional RoleAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesDrug InteractionsDrug PrescriptionsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHospitals, UniversityHumansMaleMedication ErrorsMiddle AgedAcceptance rateClinical pharmacyDrug-related problemsInterventionsMedication therapy managementNetherlandsPharmaceutical care

Identifiers

PMID32026348
PMCPMC7162822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.