Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35033079›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

Clinical pharmacist assessment of drug-related problems among intensive care unit patients in a Turkish university hospital.

Aslınur Albayrak, Bilgen Başgut, Gülbin Aygencel Bıkmaz, Bensu Karahalil

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Aslınur AlbayrakDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, FacultyofPharmacy, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey. a.albayrak007@gmail.com.
Bilgen BaşgutDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey.
Gülbin Aygencel BıkmazDepartment of Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
Bensu KarahalilDepartment of Pharmaceutical Toxicology, Faculty of Pharmacy, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
Gazi University · TRBaşkent University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCritically ill patients treated in the intensive care units (ICUs) often suffer from side effects and drug-related problems (DRPs) that can be life-threatening. A way to prevent DRPs and improve drug safety and efficacy is to include clinical pharmacists in the clinical team. This study aims to evaluate the classification of drug-related problems and the implementation of clinical pharmacy services by a clinical pharmacist in the ICU of a university hospital in Turkey.

methodsThis study was carried out prospectively between December 2020 and July 2021 in Gazi University Medical Faculty Hospital Internal Diseases ICU. All patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit for more than 24 h were included in the study. During the study, the clinical pharmacist's interventions and other clinical services for patients were recorded. DRPs were classed according to the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe V.8.02.

resultsA total of 151 patients were included during the study period corresponding to 2264 patient-days. Patients with DRPs had a longer hospital stay and a higher mortality rate (p < 0.05). 108 patients had at least one DRP and the total number of DRPs was 206. There was an average of 1.36 DRPs per patient, 71.5% of patients experienced DRP and 89.22 DRPs per 1000 patient-days. A total of 35 ADEs were observed in 32 patients. ADE incidence was per 1000 patient-days 15.45. ADEs were caused by nephrotoxicity (48.57%), electrolyte disorders (17.14%), drug-induced thrombocytopenia (17.14%), liver enzyme increase (8.57%) and other causes (8.57%). Drug selection (40.29%) and dose selection (54.36%) constituted most of the causes of DRPs. Dose change was the highest percentage of planned interventions with a rate of 56.79%. Intervention was accepted at a rate of 90.8% and it was fully implemented.

conclusionIn this study, the importance of the clinical pharmacist in the determination and analysis of DRPs was emphasized. Clinical pharmacy services like the one described should be implemented widely to increase patient safety.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsPharmaceutical PreparationsPharmacy Service, HospitalHospitals, UniversityHumansIntensive Care UnitsPharmacistsTurkeyPharmaceutical PreparationsAdverse drug eventsClinical pharmacistDrug-related problemIntensive care unitPCNEPharmaceutical care

Identifiers

PMID35033079
PMCPMC8761343
OpenAlexW4206773925

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.