ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2021
Evaluating antimicrobial prescribing in a Tertiary Healthcare Institution in Nigeria.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRegular evaluation of antimicrobials prescriptions is important for optimal use.
objectiveThis study determined the prescription patterns, class and costs of antimicrobials in the adult out-patient pharmacy of a Teaching Hospital in Nigeria.
methodsA 1-year retrospective study from 1st January to 31st December 2018. The data, which included identification code, age, sex, antibiotics prescribed, number of antibiotics per prescription, number of medicines per prescription, dosage form, generic prescribing, drug on the essential drug list, and cost, were used in the analysis. The Chi-square test and Analysis of Variance were used to compare our data with the WHO-developed antimicrobial prescription Guidelines for Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical and Defined Daily Dose assignment of 2019.
resultsFrom 450 patient records, significantly more females (70%) were prescribed with antimicrobials (P = 0.0038). The prescription pattern showed that antimicrobials selection by class was significantly different (P < 0.0001) (top three being Amino-penicillin > Nitroimidazoles > Fluoroquinolone). In addition, age differed significantly (P < 0.0001) with 46-50 as the highest class. Dosage forms profile showed that the percentage of encounter with injections prescribed (1.8%) was less than WHO recommendation (13.4-24.1%). Most of the prescriptions (84.22%) were from the Essential Drug List. The average cost of prescriptions with two antimicrobials was the highest ($14.0807), then three ($10.7949), and one ($6.39858). The average number of drugs per prescription that had one (4.28), two (4.46), and three (5.55) antimicrobials, respectively, were more than double the average (2) recommended by WHO.
conclusionThe study showed that most of the patterns are within limit, however, highlights the need for frequent evaluation.
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.