ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2021
Implementation and outcome of an electronic tool for detection of paracetamol overdose in a tertiary care hospital.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Paracetamol prescriptions in older people hospitalized in a French geriatric hospital.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Paracetamol dosing in hospital and on discharge for older people who are frail or have low body weight.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Paracetamol is a widely used analgesic and antipyretic drug in hospitals. The development and implementation of an electronic tool with algorithm-based alerts (e-agent) in a clinical information system could reduce the risk of overdose. Objective In this study, the performance of such an e-agent developed to detect paracetamol overdosing was analyzed. Setting Swiss tertiary care hospital. Method All patients ≥ 18 years old who had documented paracetamol administration in the used clinical information system during 2017 were retrospectively screened for an absolute and relative overdosing of paracetamol (> 4 g and > 60 mg/kg/24 h, respectively). This was compared with the patients for which the e-agent had, during the same period, prospectively made an alert for absolute or relative overdosing or for a dosing interval < 4 h (potentially leading to an absolute overdose). Main outcome measure E-agent performance defined as detection rate. Results of the 13,196 adult patients who received at least one dose of paracetamol, 2292 were exposed at least once to > 4 g/day (17.4%), 39 of these (0.3% of total) were given > 5 g paracetamol. None received more than 6 g. The e-agent detected 87.2% of cases with doses > 5 g. In most cases (87.9%), the cause of the absolute overdose was a switch from intravenous to oral paracetamol, resulting in an absolute overdose the day of the change. The maximal daily dose of 60 mg/kg was exceeded in 30.1% of patients weighing < 50 kg, as well as in 42.3% of patients weighing < 60 kg. The e-agent detected 73.4% and 75.5% of those cases. Multiple absolute overdoses were found in 204 patients. The e-agent detected 72.7% of those. 90 multiple overdoses occurred during the same hospital stay and 11 on consecutive days. Conclusion Paracetamol overdose is a common medication error in hospitalized patients, which may occur due to process failures such as wrong timing when changing administration route or when factors like comedication and low body weight are ignored. The e-agent detects cases of paracetamol overdose, and therefore, can help prevent this kind of medication error in the clinical setting.
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.