Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35527829›Full record

ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2022

The role of drug information centers to improve medication safety in Saudi Arabia - a study from healthcare professionals' perspective.

Mansour Almuqbil, Lamees Alrojaie, Haya Alturki, Abdullah Alhammad, Yasmin Alsharawy, Aljawharah Alkoraishi, Abdulaziz Almuqbil, Sara Alrouwaijeh, Syed Wajid, Mohamed N Al-Arifi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. 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

10 authors.

Mansour AlmuqbilClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Lamees AlrojaiePharmaceutical Services Department, King Saud Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Haya AlturkiPharmacy Services Department, King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah AlhammadClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Yasmin AlsharawyPharmacy Services Department, King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia.
Aljawharah AlkoraishiPharmacy Services Department, King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulaziz AlmuqbilCollege of Medicine, Imam Mohammed Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Sara AlrouwaijehPharmacy Services Department, King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia.
Syed WajidClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mohamed N Al-ArifiClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective: The primary function of the Drug Information Center (DIC) is to provide drug-related information to healthcare professionals. The purpose of this research was to assess the use of drug information centers by health care the professionals to improve medication safety in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A retrospective study was carried out at King Khalid University Hospital's drug and poison information center (DPIC). During the study period, requests received by drug information specialists were saved in the DPIC questions' bank. Patients' demographic, type of drug information request, caller information, number of references used, medications, class of medication, medication error type and subclass were assessed and analyzed using descriptive analysis. Medication error types were captured based on nature of questions. Results: A total of 243 drug information inquiries were assessed. Most of the inquiries were about adult population (n = 168; 69.1%). Most drug information inquiries were received from pharmacists (n = 117; 48.1%), followed by physicians (n = 94; 38.7%), then nurses (n = 23; 9.5%). Prescribing error were the most type of medication error prevented by drug information specialists (n = 214; 88.1%) followed by dispensing errors (n = 11; 4.5%). Approximately half of the medication errors in this study were near-misses (n = 110; 45.3%), followed by potential near misses (n = 84; 34.6%). Only, (n = 49; 20.2%) were identified as errors. Conclusion: This study highlights the role of drug information specialists in providing evidence-based information and helps in preventing possible medication errors which will enhance the safety of the services provided to the patients.

Indexed as

Drug information servicesHealthMedication errorsPatient safety

Identifiers

PMID35527829
PMCPMC9068519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.