Observational studyBMC pharmacology & toxicology2024
Determination of drug-related problems according to PAIR criteria in dialysis patients: a cross-sectional study in tertiary care hospital.
Observational study in BMC pharmacology & toxicology, 2024. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDialysis patients are at high risk for drug-related problems (DRPs), which have significant consequences for their morbidity, mortality, and quality of life. Improved clinical outcomes can be achieved by preventing, identifying, and resolving these problems.
methodsThis is a retrospective observational study. In this study, the PAIR instrument (Pharmacotherapy Assessment in Chronic Renal Disease) was validated for use in Turkish. Validation consisted of three stages: translation back-translation with expert panel evaluation, reliability analysis using the test-retest method, and conceptual validity with both Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe (PCNE) and PAIR used to determine DRPs prevalence.
resultsIn total, 104 patients (mean ± SD age, 54.1 ± 15.8 years; 53.8% male) were included in the study. An expert panel evaluated the items in the criterion based on their intelligibility, service of purpose, differentiation, and cultural suitability during the translation stage. Content validity index (CVI) score was found to be 0.95. The reliability analysis was performed by applying the test-retest method and calculating correlation coefficient on 30 randomly selected patients one month later. Correlation coefficient (p) was found to be 0.8. To evaluate conceptual validity, 104 patients' pharmacotherapy plans were assessed using both the PAIR and PCNE criteria. The prevalence of DRPs according to PAIR criteria (100.0%) and PCNE (73.1%) were statistically significantly different (p < 0.001).
conclusionsAs a result, PAIR criteria can identify clinically relevant DRPs in patients with CKD and is a new, validated tool to be used in Turkey, but may not be adequate for patients receiving dialysis. Therefore, it needs to be reviewed and updated for dialysis patients.
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.