Observational studyEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Detection of intravenous drug physicochemical incompatibilities in clinical practice: e-Harvis compared to reference tools.
Observational study in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. 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
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPhysicochemical incompatibilities (PCIs) resulting from the simultaneous intravenous administration of drugs through Y-sites represent a potential source of iatrogenic adverse events in hospital settings, particularly in situations involving polymedication and limited venous access. Although several compatibility databases are available, their coverage remains incomplete and their recommendations may be inconsistent. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective observational study was conducted over 30 half-day periods in four hospital departments (conventional haematology, protected haematology, adult intensive care and resuscitation (ICR) and paediatric oncology) to identify drug pairs co-administered through Y-sites and assess their compatibility using five reference tools (Handbook on Injectable Drugs, Table of Y-Site Compatibility of Injectable Drugs from the University Hospitals of Geneva, King Guide to Parenteral Admixtures, Micromedex, and Stabilis). An overall compatibility response (compatible, incompatible or unknown) was defined as the classification derived from these five tools, with incompatible assigned in case of equal classifications. This overall response was used as a comparator to evaluate the performance of e-Harvis, a decision-support tool combining bibliographic compatibility data with a predictive model used when experimental evidence is unavailable.
resultsA total of 765 administered pairs were identified, of which 56.1% were drug/drug pairs. Only one visible PCI was observed during the observation period. According to the overall response, 60.3% of pairs were compatible, 11.4% were incompatible and 28.4% were unknown. E-Harvis concluded that 32.8% were compatible, 10.6% were incompatible and 56.6% were unknown, with a 55.8% concordance with the overall response.
conclusionsThe tool also provided faster access to compatibility information and broader standalone coverage than individual reference databases for drug-drug pairs. In the absence of a validated gold standard for intravenous compatibility assessment, these findings suggest that e-Harvis may constitute a useful complementary decision-support tool for synthesising heterogeneous evidence and facilitating compatibility assessment in complex infusion settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42362916What 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.