ArticleCureus2025
Improving the Accuracy and Safety of Allergy Documentation Through a Standardized Recording System: A Quality Improvement Project at Atbara Teaching Hospital.
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.
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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncomplete allergy documentation is a major contributor to medication errors and adverse drug events. At Atbara Teaching Hospital, allergy information was inconsistently recorded, with no standardized format or visible alert system. This audit aimed to improve the completeness and accessibility of allergy documentation through the introduction of a structured sticker and brief staff training.
methodsA two-cycle clinical audit was conducted in the Department of Internal Medicine at Atbara Teaching Hospital, Sudan, between August and October 2025. The first cycle reviewed 50 inpatient records to establish baseline compliance with international documentation standards. Following this, a standardized "Allergy Documentation Sticker" was designed and implemented, accompanied by short educational sessions for staff. The second cycle reviewed another 50 records post intervention. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests for significance.
resultsBaseline compliance with allergy documentation standards was poor. Fields such as allergen, reaction type, and severity were absent in all records (0/50, 0%). After introducing the sticker, compliance improved significantly to 50/50 (100%) for these parameters (p < 0.001). Documentation of "Any Known Allergy?" increased from 25/50 (50%) to 50/50 (100%) (p < 0.001), while doctor name and signature improved from 0/50 (0%) to 39/50 (78%) (p < 0.001). Minor improvements were also observed in demographic details, such as "unit" (38/50 (76%) → 45/50 (90%)). Overall, statistically significant gains were recorded across most fields, reflecting enhanced accuracy, accountability, and visibility of allergy records.
conclusionIntroducing a structured allergy documentation sticker significantly improved the quality and completeness of allergy recording in a paper-based hospital setting. The intervention was low-cost, sustainable, and adaptable, aligning with global patient safety priorities. Regular audits, continued education, and progressive digital integration are recommended to sustain these improvements.
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.