Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34433219›Full record

SynthesisApplied clinical informatics2021

Effect of Electronic Prescribing Compared to Paper-Based (Handwritten) Prescribing on Primary Medication Adherence in an Outpatient Setting: A Systematic Review.

David Aluga, Lawrence A Nnyanzi, Nicola King, Elvis A Okolie, Peter Raby

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Applied clinical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

David AlugaSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University Middlesbrough, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.
Lawrence A NnyanziSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University Middlesbrough, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.
Nicola KingStudent and Library Services, Teesside University Middlesbrough, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.
Elvis A OkolieSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University Middlesbrough, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.
Peter RabySchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University Middlesbrough, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic prescriptions are often created and delivered electronically to the pharmacy while paper-based/handwritten prescriptions may be delivered to the pharmacy by the patients. These differences in the mode of creation and transmission of the two types of prescription could influence the rate at which outpatients fill new prescriptions of previously untried medications.

objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate literatures to determine the impact of electronic prescribing compared with paper-based/handwritten prescribing on primary medication adherence in an outpatient setting.

methodsThe keywords and phrases "outpatients," "e-prescriptions," "paper-based prescriptions," and "primary medication adherence" were combined with their relevant synonyms and medical subject headings. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on EMBASE, CINAHL, and MEDLINE databases, and Google Scholar. The results of the search were screened and selected using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) was used for quality appraisal of included studies. Data relevant to the objective of the review were extracted and analyzed through narrative synthesis.

resultsA total of 10 original studies were included in the final review, including 1 prospective randomized study and 9 observational studies. Nine of the 10 studies were performed in the United States. Four of the studies indicated that electronic prescribing significantly increases initial medication adherence, while four of the studies suggested the opposite. The remaining two studies found no significant difference in primary medication adherence between the two methods of prescribing. The variations in the studies did not allow the homogeneity required for meta-analysis to be achieved.

conclusionThe conflicting findings relating to the efficacy of primary medication adherence across both systems demonstrate the need for a standardized measure of medication adherence. This would help further determine the respective benefits of both approaches. Future research should also be conducted in different countries to give a more accurate representation of adherence.

Indexed as

Electronic PrescribingHumansMedication AdherenceOutpatientsProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID34433219
PMCPMC8387129

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.