ArticleBMC pharmacology & toxicology2022
Factors associated with a basic common drug-drug interaction knowledge among emergency department medical personnel.
Article in BMC pharmacology & toxicology, 2022. 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, 3 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDrug-drug interactions (DDIs) are common but less concerning in clinical practice of time-sensitive situations. We aimed to identify factors associated with a basic common DDI knowledge among an emergency physician (EP), an emergency medicine resident (EMR), and an emergency care nurse (ECN).
methodsThis was a prospective cross-sectional study. EP, EMR, and ECN did the examination (multiple-choice questions, 40 points) about common DDI. Prespecified factors associated with examination scores were profession, longer emergency medicine experience, pharmacological training, last advanced cardiovascular life support (ACLS) training, DDI checker book, and application user experience. The outcome was an examination score to evaluate the ability of DDI knowledge. Univariable and multivariable means regressions were used.
resultsA total of 244 participants were enrolled. Factors associated with high examination score were EP (unadjusted mean difference 3.3 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1 to 4.5, p < 0.001), EMR (2.1, 95% CI 0.7 to 3.5, p 0.005) compared to ECN. Last ACLS training within 2 years (3.7, 95% CI 0.7 to 6.6, p 0.015), 2-4 years (3.4, 95% CI 0.4 to 6.5, p 0.027), and ≥4 years (4.4, 95% CI 1.2 to 7.6, p 0.007) were higher score than no ACLS training. Moreover, the DDI checker application experience user (1.7, 95% CI 0.6 to 2.8, p 0.003) also had a high score compared to the non-experienced user. After adjustment for all factors, EP (adjusted mean difference 3.3 points, 95% CI 1.8 to 4.7, p < 0.001), EMR (2.5, 95% CI 0.6 to 4.3, p 0.010) were higher scores compared to ECN. Meanwhile, the last ACLS training ≥4 years (3.3, 95% CI 0.1 to 6.6, p 0.042) was a higher score than no ACLS training.
conclusionEP, EMR, and the last ACLS training ≥4 years were associated with higher DDI knowledge than ECN and no ACLS training, respectively.
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.