Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33013415›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2020

Drug-Related Problems Identified During Pharmacy Intervention and Consultation: Implementation of an Intensive Care Unit Pharmaceutical Care Model.

Xiao-Xiao Li, Si-Qian Zheng, Jia-Hui Gu, Tao Huang, Fang Liu, Qing-Gang Ge, Bin Liu, Chao Li, Min Yi, You-Fa Qin and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Xiao-Xiao LiDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Si-Qian ZhengDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Jia-Hui GuDepartment of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Tao HuangDepartment of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Fang LiuDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Qing-Gang GeDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Bin LiuInformation Management and Big Data Center, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Chao LiDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Min YiDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
You-Fa QinDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, SSL Center Hospital of Dongguan City, Dongguan, China.
Rong-Sheng ZhaoDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Lu-Wen ShiDepartment of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Peking University Third Hospital · CNPeking University · CNDongguan People’s Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo identify common drug-related problems (DRPs) during pharmacy intervention and consultation in an intensive care unit (ICU); to explore the gap between physicians and pharmacists on their understanding of each other's capabilities and needs.

methodWe conducted a single-center prospective study in the ICU of a tertiary academic hospital for 21 months. A pharmaceutical care (PC) model was implemented by a pharmacy team, and data were collected during pharmacy intervention and consultation. Data analysis was performed on identified DRPs, causes and their relationships. DRPs' frequency during intervention and consultation was compared. Problem-level descriptive analysis and network analysis were conducted using R 3.6.3.

resultImplementation of PC model greatly improved the efficacy of pharmacists in both interventions proposed to solve DRPs (from 13.6 to 20.1 cases per month) and number of patients being closely monitored (from 7.7 to 16.9 per month). Pharmacists identified 427 DRPs during pharmacy intervention with primarily adverse drug events (ADEs, 34.7%) and effect of treatment not optimal (25.5%), and 245 DRPs during consultation (mainly ADEs, 58.4%). About three-fifths DRPs were caused by antibiotics. Comparing DRPs identified during pharmacy intervention and consultation, physicians consulted pharmacists more on questions related to medication safety, while pharmacists also paid attention to treatment effectiveness, which was consulted less commonly.

conclusionImplementation of PC model is beneficial in guiding pharmacy practice and improving efficacy especially under limited human resources. Physicians and pharmacists shall continue ensuring drug safety and be familiar with the scope of PC and clinical need for a better cooperation.

Indexed as

critical carehospital medicinemedical errorpatient safetypharmacists

Identifiers

PMID33013415
PMCPMC7516263
OpenAlexW3085487711

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.