ArticlePharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Pharmacists' Perceptions on Safety Alerts of the Drug Utilization Review (DUR) in Electronic Health Records in a Tertiary Healthcare Hospital.
Article in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. 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, 1 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic Drug Alarms and Drug Utilization Reviews (DURs) are crucial in improving patient safety by reducing the dispensing of contraindicated medications and minimizing adverse drug events. The DUR system often generates low-level alerts, making it challenging for pharmacists and doctors to discern more critical alerts. This can result in alert fatigue, causing burnout and jeopardizing patient safety. A cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary hospital to explore pharmacists' perspectives and experience with the DUR system. This study aimed to identify their responses to alerts indicating a need to change the original prescription and the difficulties encountered. Out of all the participants, 85% had prior experience with DUR alerts. However, 40% of them expressed dissatisfaction with the alerts. Moreover, 88% of the participants received highly frequent DUR alerts, but only 40% believed that DUR alerts could identify rare adverse drug reactions. Additionally, only 27% of the participants altered their prescriptions based on alerts for the MAOI/serotonin modulator. The survey showed that 66% of participants believe improvements are necessary for the DUR system. Specifically, 77% of participants felt that more information is needed on overlapping prescriptions, 82% on patients with chronic diseases, and 82% on potential reactions caused by co-administration. At the same time, 75% raised concern about the need for backup for any server breakdown. Positive perceptions about DUR lead to changing the prescription in response to an alert. Therefore, improving the DUR system is crucial to prevent pharmacists from missing important alerts and to increase their awareness of clinically significant alarm signals. By doing so, we can optimize patient safety and contribute to providing high-quality healthcare services.
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.