ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2021
Evaluation of patients' knowledge about oral anticoagulant medicines and use of alert cards by community pharmacists.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of a self-screening tool and patient alert cards to help patients identify and manage severe adverse drug reactions.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Unlocking Urban India's Awareness of Oral Anticoagulation: Implications for Healthcare Education.Turkish journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2025Article
- An Evaluation of Oral Anticoagulant Safety Indicators by England's Community Pharmacies.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Assessing the knowledge of medical undergraduates on oral anticoagulation therapy.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2023Article
- Anticoagulation Interventions by Pharmacists in Acute Care.The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2023Article
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
Background Anticoagulants continue to pose high risk of harm to patients despite the discovery of novel direct-acting oral anticoagulant agents that require less monitoring than warfarin. Objective To evaluate patients' knowledge about their oral anticoagulants and the potential role for community pharmacists in optimising safety. Setting Community pharmacies in England. Methods An online survey-based evaluation conducted over a 5-month period to ascertain patients' knowledge, use of anticoagulant alert cards, compliance with national monitoring requirements for warfarin, and frequency and nature of community pharmacist involvement in optimisation. Differences between patients on direct-acting oral anticoagulant agents and warfarin were assessed using Chi squared tests. Main outcome measure Patients' knowledge and use of anticoagulant alert cards. Results A total of 1515 pharmacies participated. Of 22,624 patients, 97% knew that they were taking anticoagulants; 20% had alert cards with them at time of dispensing; 17% had no card and 10% refuted their usefulness. Patients on warfarin were more aware of interactions with over-the-counter or herbal medicines than those on direct-acting oral anticoagulant agents. Of the patients on warfarin, 82% confirmed monitoring in the previous 12 weeks in accordance with national standards, with the international normalised ratio value known for 76%. Pharmacists intervened in a fifth of the patients to issue an alert card, contact the general practitioner for a change in the prescription or due to interacting medicines. Conclusion Patients had reasonable knowledge of their anticoagulation therapy, but areas for improvement were identified. Community pharmacists are well placed to optimise the safe use of anticoagulants.
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.