Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40171358›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Improving Antiemetic and Analgesic Prescribing Practices for Patients With Advanced Liver Disease: A Clinical Audit.

David Baird, Scott Calvert, Fiona Finlay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

David BairdGastroenterology and Hepatology, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, GBR.
Scott CalvertGastroenterology and Hepatology, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, GBR.
Fiona FinlayPalliative Care, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective Previous studies have demonstrated that local analgesic and antiemetic prescribing practices were inconsistent with best practices. In light of this, we aimed to assess the current prescribing practices against best practices, as defined by national guidelines. Methods This study involved a point-prevalence audit in the inpatient gastroenterology wards at a University Teaching Hospital in Glasgow. Patients were identified by case notes; a clinical diagnosis of cirrhosis documented by a consultant hepatologist was required for inclusion. Data including Child-Pugh score and prescribed medications were collected. Prescribing practice was reaudited after each intervention. Interventions included educational seminars, posters, and the formulation of new local guidelines. Results A total of 249 inpatients were included; 70 were identified as having a clinical diagnosis of cirrhosis. The number of patients who were prescribed weak opioids decreased from 23% in cycle 1 to 11% in cycle 3. Prescription of 3 g/day paracetamol decreased from 36% to 24%. The number of patients who were prescribed an inappropriate antiemetic decreased from 45% to 17%. Laxatives, topical analgesics, and adjuvant analgesics were variably prescribed in all three cycles. Conclusions The development of concise local guidelines and targeted educational interventions for junior medical staff can improve prescribing practices for inpatients with decompensated cirrhosis. Currently, significant variability exists in the routine prescription of laxatives, adjuvants, and topical analgesics.

Indexed as

: analgesiaantiemetic agentsclincal auditdecompensated liver failureguidelinehepatologysupportive and palliative care

Identifiers

PMID40171358
PMCPMC11960720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.