Implementation of medication alert systems and pharmacist satisfaction: a questionnaire-based study.

IF 1.3 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Takashi Omoto, Manato Inagaki, Junichi Asaka, Kenzo Kudo
{"title":"Implementation of medication alert systems and pharmacist satisfaction: a questionnaire-based study.","authors":"Takashi Omoto, Manato Inagaki, Junichi Asaka, Kenzo Kudo","doi":"10.1186/s40780-026-00611-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As a component of clinical decision support systems, medication alert systems (MAS) play an important role in preventing medication errors. However, their effectiveness is often limited by alert fatigue. Comprehensive data on the implementation and use of specific MAS functions in clinical practice in Japan are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the implementation of specific MAS functions and identify challenges in real-world use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a questionnaire-based study conducted among pharmacists at 65 hospitals in Iwate Prefecture, Japan. This questionnaire assessed MAS implementation, functionality, and pharmacists' satisfaction with MAS, while distinguishing between alerts for physicians (primary alerts) and pharmacists (secondary alerts). Satisfaction was assessed using a 7-point Likert scale. Responses were summarized using medians and interquartile ranges (IQR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 65 hospitals, 41 responded to the questionnaire (response rate: 63.1%). 85.4% of hospitals implemented a primary alert system, and 80.5% implemented a secondary alert system. Drug-drug contraindication checks were widely implemented for primary and secondary alerts (91.4% and 97.0%, respectively), whereas variations in the implementation of disease contraindication checks and drug allergy checks were observed between primary and secondary alerts (51.4% vs. 33.3%, and 91.4% vs. 36.4%, respectively). The median overall satisfaction score among pharmacists for secondary alerts was 5 (IQR: 3-5). Lower satisfaction scores were observed for disease contraindication (median: 2; IQR: 1.5-4) and drug allergy checks (median: 2.5; IQR: 2-3.5). Excessive alerts, discrepancies between alert content and clinical judgment, and system-related limitations were the most common reasons for dissatisfaction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although MAS were widely implemented, variations in alert functions and their use were observed across hospitals and between physicians and pharmacists. Pharmacists commonly reported excessive alerts, discrepancies between alert results and clinical judgment, and system-related limitations as reasons for dissatisfaction. Lower satisfaction was observed for disease contraindication and drug allergy checks, suggesting that these functions require further improvement. These findings highlight the need to optimize alert settings, improve system integration, and enhance the clinical relevance of alerts. Addressing these challenges may help promote the effective use of MAS and improve medication safety in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":16730,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40780-026-00611-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As a component of clinical decision support systems, medication alert systems (MAS) play an important role in preventing medication errors. However, their effectiveness is often limited by alert fatigue. Comprehensive data on the implementation and use of specific MAS functions in clinical practice in Japan are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify the implementation of specific MAS functions and identify challenges in real-world use.

Methods: This was a questionnaire-based study conducted among pharmacists at 65 hospitals in Iwate Prefecture, Japan. This questionnaire assessed MAS implementation, functionality, and pharmacists' satisfaction with MAS, while distinguishing between alerts for physicians (primary alerts) and pharmacists (secondary alerts). Satisfaction was assessed using a 7-point Likert scale. Responses were summarized using medians and interquartile ranges (IQR).

Results: Of the 65 hospitals, 41 responded to the questionnaire (response rate: 63.1%). 85.4% of hospitals implemented a primary alert system, and 80.5% implemented a secondary alert system. Drug-drug contraindication checks were widely implemented for primary and secondary alerts (91.4% and 97.0%, respectively), whereas variations in the implementation of disease contraindication checks and drug allergy checks were observed between primary and secondary alerts (51.4% vs. 33.3%, and 91.4% vs. 36.4%, respectively). The median overall satisfaction score among pharmacists for secondary alerts was 5 (IQR: 3-5). Lower satisfaction scores were observed for disease contraindication (median: 2; IQR: 1.5-4) and drug allergy checks (median: 2.5; IQR: 2-3.5). Excessive alerts, discrepancies between alert content and clinical judgment, and system-related limitations were the most common reasons for dissatisfaction.

Conclusions: Although MAS were widely implemented, variations in alert functions and their use were observed across hospitals and between physicians and pharmacists. Pharmacists commonly reported excessive alerts, discrepancies between alert results and clinical judgment, and system-related limitations as reasons for dissatisfaction. Lower satisfaction was observed for disease contraindication and drug allergy checks, suggesting that these functions require further improvement. These findings highlight the need to optimize alert settings, improve system integration, and enhance the clinical relevance of alerts. Addressing these challenges may help promote the effective use of MAS and improve medication safety in clinical practice.

药物警报系统的实施与药剂师满意度:一项基于问卷的研究。
背景:药物警示系统作为临床决策支持系统的组成部分,在预防用药差错方面发挥着重要作用。然而,它们的效果往往受到警觉性疲劳的限制。关于在日本临床实践中实施和使用特定MAS功能的综合数据有限。因此,本研究旨在澄清具体MAS功能的实现,并确定实际使用中的挑战。方法:对日本岩手县65家医院的药师进行问卷调查。该问卷评估了MAS的实施、功能和药剂师对MAS的满意度,同时区分了医生(初级警报)和药剂师(二级警报)的警报。满意度采用7分李克特量表进行评估。使用中位数和四分位数范围(IQR)总结反应。结果:65家医院中有41家回复了问卷,回复率为63.1%。85.4%的医院实施一级警报系统,80.5%的医院实施二级警报系统。一级预警和二级预警广泛实施药物-药物禁忌症检查(分别为91.4%和97.0%),而一级预警和二级预警中疾病禁忌症检查和药物过敏检查的实施情况存在差异(分别为51.4%和33.3%,91.4%和36.4%)。药师对二级报警的总体满意度中位数为5分(IQR: 3-5)。疾病禁忌症(中位数:2;IQR: 1.5-4)和药物过敏检查(中位数:2.5;IQR: 2-3.5)满意度得分较低。过多的警报,警报内容与临床判断之间的差异,以及系统相关的限制是最常见的不满意原因。结论:尽管MAS被广泛实施,但在医院之间以及医生和药剂师之间观察到警报功能及其使用的差异。药剂师通常报告过多的警报,警报结果与临床判断之间的差异,以及系统相关的限制是不满意的原因。疾病禁忌症和药物过敏检查的满意度较低,提示这些功能需要进一步改善。这些发现强调了优化警报设置、改进系统集成和增强警报临床相关性的必要性。解决这些挑战可能有助于促进MAS的有效使用,并提高临床实践中的用药安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书