Trial reportDrugs & aging2020
Factors Affecting Prescriber Implementation of Computer-Generated Medication Recommendations in the SENATOR Trial: A Qualitative Study.
Trial report in Drugs & aging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation science in care for older adults across healthcare settings: a scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Pooled it
- The value of qualitative research in randomized controlled trials involving drugs and medical devices: a systematic mapping review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Pooled it
- Medication review in hospitalised patients to reduce morbidity and mortality.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Hospital physicians' and older patients' agreement with individualised STOPP/START-based medication optimisation recommendations in a clinical trial setting.European geriatric medicine · 2022Trial
- Factors Influencing Hospital Physicians' Recognition of Prescribing Cascades: A Qualitative Interview Study.Drugs & aging · 2025Article
- An Internationally Derived Process of Healthcare Professionals' Proactive Deprescribing Steps and Constituent Activities.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Clinical decision support system supported interventions in hospitalized older patients: a matter of natural course and adequate timing.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Clinical Decision Support Systems in Hospitalized Older Patients: An Exploratory Analysis in a Real-Life Clinical Setting.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2023Article
- Implementation and evaluation of STOPP/START criteria to address polypharmacy in older adults in an inpatient psychiatric setting.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2023Article
- End-users feedback and perceptions associated with the implementation of a clinical-rule based Check of Medication Appropriateness service.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Title Assessing Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Seniors: Differences between American Geriatrics Society and STOPP Criteria, and Preventing Adverse Drug Reactions.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe SENATOR trial intervention included the provision of computer-generated medication recommendations to physician prescribers caring for hospitalised older adults (≥ 65 years), with the aim of reducing in-hospital adverse drug reactions. Interim data analysis during the trial revealed that the prescriber implementation rates of the computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations were lower than expected across all six trial sites.
aimThe aim of this qualitative study was to identify the factors affecting prescriber implementation of the medication recommendations in the SENATOR trial.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with trial researchers and physician prescribers who were provided with SENATOR recommendations. Content analysis was used to identify the most relevant domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) that affected recommendation uptake.
resultsTen trial researchers and fourteen prescribers were interviewed across the six trial sites. Eight TDF domains were found to be most relevant in affecting prescriber implementation: 'environmental context and resources', 'goals', 'intentions', 'knowledge', 'beliefs about consequences', 'memory, attention and decision processes', 'social/professional role and identity', and 'social influences'. Interviewees felt that there was often a disconnect between the time prescribers were reviewing the patient and the point at which the recommendations were provided. However, when recommendations were reviewed, prescriber inertia was highly pervasive, with a particular reluctance to make pharmacotherapy changes outside their own specialty. Implementation was facilitated by recommendations reaching a 'decision-maker', but this was often not possible as the software could not evaluate the entire clinical context of patients, and thus frequently produced recommendations of low clinical relevance.
conclusionThis study has demonstrated that the clinical relevance of the SENATOR prescribing recommendations was a significant factor affecting their implementation. Whilst software refinement will be necessary to improve the quality of recommendations, future interventions will need to be multifaceted to overcome the complex prescriber specialty culture within the acute hospital environment.
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.