ArticleBMJ open quality2024
Secondary uses of electronic prescribing and pharmacy data in UK hospital care: a national survey.
Article in BMJ open quality, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic hospital pharmacy (EHP) systems are ubiquitous in today's hospitals, with many also implementing electronic prescribing (EP) systems; both contain a potential wealth of medication-related data to support quality improvement. The reasons for reuse and users of this data are generally unknown. Our objectives were to survey secondary use of data (SUD) from EHP and EP systems in UK hospitals, to identify users of and factors influencing SUD.A national postal survey was sent out to all hospital chief pharmacists with pre-notifications and follow-up reminders. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed.Of 187 hospital organisations, 65 (35%) responded. All had EHP systems (for ≥20 years) and all reused data; 50 (77%) had EP systems (established 1-10 years) but only 40 (80%) reused data. Reported facilitators for SUD included medication safety, providing feedback, benchmarking, saving time and patient experience. The purposes of SUD included audits, quality improvement, risk management and general medication-related reporting. Earlier introduction of SUD could provide an opportunity to heighten local improvement initiatives.Data from EHP systems is reused for multiple purposes. Evaluating SUD and sharing experiences could provide richer insight into potential SUD and barriers/factors to consider when implementing or upgrading EP/EHP systems.
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.