ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2020
Quality assessment and cost saving of renal dosing recommendation by clinical pharmacists at medical wards in Thailand.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dosage adjustments in renal impairment among medical ward patients: ChatGPT® and DeepSeek® models' effectiveness in assessing those adjustments.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Qualitative changes in clinical records after implementation of pharmacist-led antimicrobial stewardship program: a text mining analysis.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2025Article
- A clinical decision support system promotes the appropriate use of drugs in hospitalized patients with kidney impairment.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2025Review
- Effects of inpatient creatinine testing frequency on acute kidney injury identification and staging: a historical cohort study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Renal dosage adjustment for patients with reduced kidney function is a common function of clinical pharmacy service. Assessment of pharmacist's intervention in the aspect of quality and economic impact should be conducted to evaluate the benefit of this service. Objective This study aimed to assess the quality and cost saving of clinical pharmacists' recommendation on renal dosage adjustment among patients with reduced kidney function. Setting Eight medical wards of the Siriraj Hospital, a tertiary-care hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. Method A retrospective study was conducted using medical records and clinical pharmacist's intervention database. All patients admitted to the study wards whose estimated creatinine clearance were less than 60 mL/min or presented with acute kidney injury on admission during October 2016-December 2017 were included. The targeted medications were antimicrobial agents. Main outcome measure Percentage of the concordance between pharmacists' recommendation compared to standard dosing references and related cost saving. Results Among 158 patients, pharmacists provided 190 recommendations, including 151 (79.1%) dose reduction, 17 (8.9%) dose increase and 22 (11.5%) recommendations to provide supplemental dose after dialysis. These recommendations were 90.5% consistent with standard references. Physician accepted and complied with 89.5% of pharmacists' recommendations. Average direct cost saving was €5,114.11 while cost avoidance was €863.47. Conclusion Trained clinical pharmacists were able to provide high-quality recommendation on dosage adjustment in these patients in accordance to standard dosing guidelines. In addition, dosage adjustment also led to a significant direct cost saving and cost avoidance from prevention of adverse drug reactions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32221826What 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.