ArticlePreventive medicine reports2021
Provider documentation of electronic nicotine delivery systems use among patients prescribed contraception at an academic health center in the Southeastern United States.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWomen on combined hormonal contraception (CHC) who use electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) may be vulnerable to adverse cardiovascular events. To date, no study has examined whether clinicians screen for ENDS use when prescribing CHC. Therefore, we investigated documentation of ENDS screening and counseling in the electronic health record (EHR) of women prescribed CHC.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective EHR review and content analysis at an academic health center in the Southeastern United States. We randomly selected 500 records of female patients 12 years and older who had been prescribed contraception and had ENDS documented in their records identified via keyword match. Records prior to July 2020 were reviewed between June-September 2020.
resultsOf the 500 patients, 245 (49%) were ENDS users and 227 (45.4%) were non-ENDS users. Among ENDS users, there were 82 contraception-related encounters with ENDS documentation. In 55 (67.1%) of these encounters, only ENDS use status was documented. The provider counseled against ENDS use in 17 (20.7%) records. Six (7.3%) notes documented provision of patient education materials instructing patients on contraception to refrain from using ENDS. Among non-ENDS users, there were 43 contraception-related encounters with ENDS documentation; 35 (81.4%) documented the patient did not use ENDS and 3 (7%) documented provision of patient education materials.
conclusionENDS use is under-documented in contraception-related encounters. Improvements in documentation may help assess long-term effects of concurrent ENDS and CHC use. These results illustrate the need to clarify EHR prompts and increase provider awareness to improve ENDS documentation.
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.