ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Implementation of Guideline-Based Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors for Perioperative Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis: A Pre-Post Study Guided by CFIR-ERIC.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The overuse and misuse of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in perioperative patients for stress ulcers prophylactic (SUP) is crucial. This study evaluated the impact of a Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (CFIR-ERIC)-guided intervention on the rational use of PPIs in a perioperative setting. Methods: A single-center pre-post study was conducted at Beijing Chaoyang Hospital between April and November 2023. All hospitalized patients who used perioperative PPIs for SUP were included. Cases post-intervention were defined as the intervention group and were propensity score-matched with pre-intervention cases, which was defined as the control group. The intervention strategies were developed by following the updated CFIR framework and employing CFIR-ERIC strategies. Outcomes included rational use of PPIs, reasons for irrational use, total hospitalization and drug costs, PPI duration, costs, and average defined daily dose. Results: 1122 cases were included in the intervention group and control group after propensity score matching, respectively. The intervention group showed significant improved rate of rational PPI use (81.7% vs 42.0%, p<0.001). Rates of non-indication use, inappropriate dosage and administration, drug selection, and administration route were significantly reduced (all p<0.05). Coagulation disorders or anticoagulant/antiplatelet treatment, severe trauma or multiple injuries, severe infection or sepsis were the three most prevalent severe risk factors among patients, with 46.7% and 29.5% of the two groups, respectively. We found no significant differences between the two groups in total hospitalization costs (¥55,672.84 vs ¥57,021.73, p=0.621) and total drug costs (¥3005.38 vs ¥3260.98, p=0.206). Additionally, PPI costs (¥7.44 vs ¥93.70, p<0.001) and defined daily dose (7.00 vs 8.00, p<0.001) were significantly lower in the intervention group. We also observed a downward trend in PPI duration (6.00 days vs 5.00 days, p=0.075). Conclusion: The CFIR-ERIC-guided intervention effectively improved the rational use of PPIs for perioperative SUP, resulting in significant reductions in both the PPI duration and costs.
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.