Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38264553›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of preventive medicine2023

Preventive Risk Assessment of Medication in Intensive Wards.

Hadi Hayati, Majid Piramoon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of preventive medicine, 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

2 authors.

Hadi HayatiRazi Herbal Medicines Research Center, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.
Majid PiramoonRazi Herbal Medicines Research Center, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Failure mode and effect analysis (FEMA) approach as one of the preventive risk management strategies to identify and prevent errors in the medication process in nursing care in the 10 intensive wards in two large hospitals in Khorramabad. Methods: This study is applied descriptive research, which is conducted as a mixed-method quantitative-qualitative approach using focus group discussion. Results: The average risk priority number (RPN) score for the intensive care unit (ICU) in this study was 20.97. The highest RPN scores were associated with the SICU (Surgical ICU) and EICU (Emergency ICU) wards with RPN of 24.66 and 22.71, respectively. Among the steps of the medication process, the first step "physician order" had the highest score (RPN = 26.08). Conclusions: The intensive wards, which had high RPN scores are exposed to more risk of the drug medication process like EICU and SICU; also, simple acts such as handwriting readable by a physician can considerably reduce risk in the ICU.

Indexed as

Intensive carepharmaceutical preparationsrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID38264553
PMCPMC10803670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.