ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2023
Bedside check of medication appropriateness (BED-CMA) as a risk-based tool for bedside clinical pharmacy services: A proof-of-concept study at the trauma surgery ward.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 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.
- The impact of the bedside check of medication appropriateness (BED-CMA) at the hematology ward: a mixed-methods study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bedside clinical pharmacy prevents drug-related problems, but is not feasible in many countries due to limited resources. Hence, clinical rules using structural information in the electronic health record can help identifying potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs). We aimed to develop and implement a risk-based clinical pharmacy service and evaluate its impact on prescribing at the trauma surgery ward. Methods: The proportion of residual PIPs per day, i.e. the number of PIPs that persisted up to 24 h after pharmacist intervention divided by the number of PIPs at T0, was evaluated before and after implementation of the intervention in an interrupted time series analysis. The pre-intervention cohort received usual pharmacy services, i.e. a 0.3 FTE clinical pharmacist trainee. Fifteen clinical rules, targeting antimicrobial, anticoagulant and analgesic therapy were implemented in the post-intervention period. The pre-intervention period was compared to two post-intervention scenarios: A) clinical rule alerts reviewed by a 0.3 FTE clinical pharmacist trainee; and B) clinical rule alerts reviewed daily for approximately 1 h by a clinical pharmacist trainee. Results: Pre-intervention, a median proportion of 67% (range 0%-100%) residual PIPs per day was observed. Scenario A showed an immediate relative reduction of 14% (p = 0.72) and scenario B a significant immediate relative reduction of 85% (p = 0.0015) in residual PIPs per day. In scenario A, recommendations were provided for 19% of clinical rule alerts, of which 67% was accepted by the surgeon within 24 h. In scenario B, recommendations were given for 56% of alerts, of which 84% was accepted. Conclusions: Using clinical rules is an effective approach to organize bedside clinical pharmacy services and improves prescribing at the trauma surgery ward. Advanced training and daily follow-up of the clinical rules are two requirements to be considered.
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.