Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32839258›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2020

Analgesic consumption evolution at the emergency department of a university hospital (2006-2017): a defined daily doses based analysis.

Charles-Patrick Mortier, Maxime Farny, Jacques Bouget, Michel Le Duff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2020. 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

4 authors.

Charles-Patrick MortierPharmaceutical Information Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France.
Maxime FarnyPharmacy and Therapeutic Committee, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France.
Jacques BougetEmergency Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France.
Michel Le DuffPharmaceutical Information Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePain management in the emergency department (ED) is a key issue that must be regularly evaluated. Practice evaluation gold standard remains patient file analysis, but is highly time consuming. The aim of this study is to evaluate the interest of a defined daily dose (DDD) based analysis in the evaluation of pain management in the ED.

methodsA local indicator was elaborated based on the DDD concept: the defined dose per admission (DDA). Unlike the DDD that corresponds to a standardised total dose administered over a day, the DDA represents the average total dose administrated to a patient throughout the stay in the ED. A DDA was assigned to every analgesic, from step 1 to step 3. Oral and injectable forms were studied, but transdermal forms were not considered. DDA values were assimilated to the existing DDDs when these were officially established by the WHO. When values were not defined by the WHO, mean values observed in local practice were selected. Annual numbers of patients admitted to the ED and quantities of each analgesic supplied by the pharmacy ward were annually extracted from respective data files. Paediatric patients being treated at a specific separate ED, only adults were considered throughout the study. Raw quantities of analgesics used each year were converted to their equivalent amounts in DDA, and then expressed in numbers of DDA per 100 admissions (DDA/100A). This indicator allowed us to describe relative evolutions of analgesics prescriptions from 2006 to 2017.

resultsAnalgesic overall use rose from 18.4 to 30.2 DDA/100A between 2006 and 2017, representing a prescription increase of 64%. Throughout the study, step 1 analgesics rose from 10.8 to 19.3 DDA/100A (+79%), step 3 from 1.8 to 5.4 (+200%) and step 2 remained stable around 5.6 DDA/100A. The integration of orodispersible paracetamol tablets in 2013 allowed us to halve the consumption of injectable paracetamol in the long term and had no effect on classic paracetamol oral forms such as tablets or capsules. Tramadol increased from 41% to 78% among step 2 analgesics after the withdrawal of dextropropoxyphene in 2011. Codeine use shows a steady decline from 1.9 DDA/100A in 2011 to 0.72 in 2017. DISCUSSION/

conclusionThe DDA concept appears to be an effective tool for assessing long-term analgesic-use trends at hospital EDs. This tool can also mitigate one major bias at EDs, that is the lack of traceability of analgesic administration in emergency contexts. This tool could be adjusted by integrating the average length of stay in the ED.

Indexed as

AnalgesicsAnalgesics, Non-NarcoticAnalgesics, OpioidDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleEmergency Service, HospitalHospitals, UniversityHumansPain ManagementPain MeasurementAnalgesicsAnalgesics, Non-NarcoticAnalgesics, Opioidacute painclinical auditdrug formulary managementpain managementquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID32839258
PMCPMC7447246

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.