ArticleiGIE : innovation, investigation and insights2025
Improvement in documentation rates for resumption of antithrombotic agents after elective endoscopy using an electronic health record-based intervention.
Article in iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Resumption recommendations for anticoagulants (ACs) and antiplatelet agents (APAs) after endoscopy are inconsistently documented, which has been associated with a small but clinically significant number of adverse events (AEs). Clinical decision support systems must be implemented properly to ensure high adoption and clinically appropriate use. This study aimed to improve the rate of documentation of resumption recommendations for ACs and APAs using an electronic health record-based intervention integrated into the existing clinical workflow. Methods: We implemented a soft-stop endoscopy software alert to trigger if resumption recommendations were not initially documented in patients on ACs and APAs. The rates of documentation of resumption recommendations were compared between pre- and postintervention periods. Results: Across 1238 encounters for elective outpatient endoscopy, there was no difference in AC and APA use between pre- and postintervention periods. More endoscopies were performed in patients taking ACs (77.9%) compared with those taking APAs (25.3%). The intervention led to a significant increase in documentation of resumption recommendations postintervention from 47.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 42.6-51.6) and 41.6% (95% CI, 34.1-49.6) to 70.5% (95% CI, 66.3-74.4; Conclusions: Implementing an electronic health record-based intervention into the existing endoscopy workflow improved the documentation of resumption recommendations for antithrombotic medications after elective outpatient endoscopy.
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.