Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37692642›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

An Evaluation of Drug-Drug Interaction Alerts Produced by Clinical Decision Support Systems in a Tertiary Hospital.

Abdullah Alanazi, Wejdan Alalawi, Bakheet Aldosari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Abdullah AlanaziHealth Informatics, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, SAU.
Wejdan AlalawiNursing, Prince Mohammed Bin Abdulaziz Hospital, Medina, SAU.
Bakheet AldosariHealth Informatics, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, SAU.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) have the potential to harm patients. Hence, DDI alerts are meant to prevent harm; as a result, their usefulness is reduced when most alerts displayed to providers are ignored. This study aims to explore the rates and reasons for overriding alerts of DDI. Methods This is a retrospective study of DDI alert overrides that occurred between January 2020 and December 2020 within the inpatient medical records at a tertiary hospital, Medina City, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Results A total of 7,098 DDI alerts were generated from inpatient settings, of which 6,551(92.2%) were overridden by the physicians at the point of prescribing. "Will Monitor as Recommended" (33%) was the most common reason for the override, followed by 'Will Adjust the Dose as Recommended (27.1%)," "The Patient Has Already Tolerated the Combination" (25.7%), and "No Overridden Reason Selected" (13.0%). Discussion The DDI alert overriding is still high and is comparable to other studies. However, this study reveals that physicians are ready to deal with the consequences of around 58% of DDI alerts. Additionally, 13% of physicians were not willing to report the reason for overriding. This indicates an urgent need to review and restructure the DDI alert system. Conclusion The DDI alert override rates are high, and this is undesirable. It is recommended to revise the DDI alert system. Future studies should dig deep for real reasons for overriding and seek inputs from all stakeholders, including developing actionable metrics to track and monitor DDI alerting system.

Indexed as

adverse drug eventsclinical decision support systems (cdss)computerized provider order entry (cpoe)ddi alertsdrug interactions

Identifiers

PMID37692642
PMCPMC10484150

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.