Rashudy F Mahomedradja, Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte, Kim C E Sigaloff, Jelle Tichelaar, Michiel A van Agtmael
{"title":"\"医生,如果这位病人的用药存在处方错误,您会感到惊讶吗?确定符合院内药物治疗管理条件的患者:匹配病例对照研究。","authors":"Rashudy F Mahomedradja, Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte, Kim C E Sigaloff, Jelle Tichelaar, Michiel A van Agtmael","doi":"10.1111/bcp.16253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evaluating a patient's medication list is critical to reduce prescribing errors (PEs), but is a labour- and time-intensive process. Identification of patients at risk of PEs could improve the allocation of scarce time and resources, but currently available prediction tools are not effective.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate whether ward doctors can identify patients at risk of PEs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective matched case-control study was conducted on three clinical wards in an academic hospital. Otolaryngology and oncology ward doctors used clinical intuition to select patients requiring a clinical medication review (CMR) (cases). These patients were then matched 1:1 on age (±10 years) and number (±1) of prescriptions with patients not selected for CMRs on the internal medicine and upper gastrointestinal surgery ward (controls). A multidisciplinary in-hospital pharmacotherapeutic stewardship team assessed the prevalence of PEs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 387 patients with 5191 prescriptions were included. Overall, 799 PEs affecting 279 patients (72.1%) were identified. Most PEs (58.8%) occurred during hospitalization. There were no significant differences in age, number of prescriptions, sex, renal function or documented allergies or intolerances between the cases and controls or between controls and other patients who did not receive a CMR. The incidence of PEs was higher in cases than in controls (97.5% vs 72.5%, odds ratio = 14.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8-121.1, P = .002)). The rate of PEs was three times higher in cases than in controls (incidence rate ratio = 3.0, 95% CI 2.3-4.0, P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ward doctors can effectively identify patients with PEs, and thus at risk of medication-related harm, using clinical intuition.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Doctor, would it surprise you if there were prescribing errors in this patient's medication?\\\" Identifying eligible patients for in-hospital pharmacotherapeutic stewardship: A matched case-control study.\",\"authors\":\"Rashudy F Mahomedradja, Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte, Kim C E Sigaloff, Jelle Tichelaar, Michiel A van Agtmael\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bcp.16253\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evaluating a patient's medication list is critical to reduce prescribing errors (PEs), but is a labour- and time-intensive process. Identification of patients at risk of PEs could improve the allocation of scarce time and resources, but currently available prediction tools are not effective.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate whether ward doctors can identify patients at risk of PEs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective matched case-control study was conducted on three clinical wards in an academic hospital. Otolaryngology and oncology ward doctors used clinical intuition to select patients requiring a clinical medication review (CMR) (cases). These patients were then matched 1:1 on age (±10 years) and number (±1) of prescriptions with patients not selected for CMRs on the internal medicine and upper gastrointestinal surgery ward (controls). A multidisciplinary in-hospital pharmacotherapeutic stewardship team assessed the prevalence of PEs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 387 patients with 5191 prescriptions were included. Overall, 799 PEs affecting 279 patients (72.1%) were identified. Most PEs (58.8%) occurred during hospitalization. There were no significant differences in age, number of prescriptions, sex, renal function or documented allergies or intolerances between the cases and controls or between controls and other patients who did not receive a CMR. The incidence of PEs was higher in cases than in controls (97.5% vs 72.5%, odds ratio = 14.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8-121.1, P = .002)). The rate of PEs was three times higher in cases than in controls (incidence rate ratio = 3.0, 95% CI 2.3-4.0, P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ward doctors can effectively identify patients with PEs, and thus at risk of medication-related harm, using clinical intuition.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.16253\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.16253","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:评估患者的用药清单对于减少处方错误(PE)至关重要,但这是一个耗费人力和时间的过程。识别有发生 PE 风险的患者可改善稀缺时间和资源的分配,但目前可用的预测工具并不有效:调查病房医生能否识别有 PE 风险的患者:这项前瞻性匹配病例对照研究在一家学术医院的三个临床病房进行。耳鼻喉科和肿瘤科病房医生通过临床直觉选择需要进行临床用药检查(CMR)的患者(病例)。然后将这些患者与内科病房和上消化道外科病房未被选中进行临床用药检查的患者(对照组)在年龄(±10 岁)和处方数量(±1)上进行 1:1 匹配。一个多学科院内药物治疗管理小组评估了PE的发生率:结果:共纳入 387 名患者和 5191 张处方。结果:共纳入了 387 名患者的 5191 张处方,发现了 279 名患者(72.1%)的 799 例 PE。大多数 PE(58.8%)发生在住院期间。病例与对照组之间,或对照组与其他未接受 CMR 的患者之间,在年龄、处方数量、性别、肾功能或有记录的过敏或不耐受方面没有明显差异。病例的 PE 发生率高于对照组(97.5% 对 72.5%,几率比 = 14.8,95% 置信区间 [CI] 1.8-121.1,P = .002))。病例的 PE 发病率是对照组的三倍(发病率比 = 3.0,95% 置信区间 [CI] 2.3-4.0,P = 0.002):病房医生可以通过临床直觉有效识别 PE 患者,从而识别出与药物相关的伤害风险。
"Doctor, would it surprise you if there were prescribing errors in this patient's medication?" Identifying eligible patients for in-hospital pharmacotherapeutic stewardship: A matched case-control study.
Background: Evaluating a patient's medication list is critical to reduce prescribing errors (PEs), but is a labour- and time-intensive process. Identification of patients at risk of PEs could improve the allocation of scarce time and resources, but currently available prediction tools are not effective.
Objective: To investigate whether ward doctors can identify patients at risk of PEs.
Methods: This prospective matched case-control study was conducted on three clinical wards in an academic hospital. Otolaryngology and oncology ward doctors used clinical intuition to select patients requiring a clinical medication review (CMR) (cases). These patients were then matched 1:1 on age (±10 years) and number (±1) of prescriptions with patients not selected for CMRs on the internal medicine and upper gastrointestinal surgery ward (controls). A multidisciplinary in-hospital pharmacotherapeutic stewardship team assessed the prevalence of PEs.
Results: A total of 387 patients with 5191 prescriptions were included. Overall, 799 PEs affecting 279 patients (72.1%) were identified. Most PEs (58.8%) occurred during hospitalization. There were no significant differences in age, number of prescriptions, sex, renal function or documented allergies or intolerances between the cases and controls or between controls and other patients who did not receive a CMR. The incidence of PEs was higher in cases than in controls (97.5% vs 72.5%, odds ratio = 14.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8-121.1, P = .002)). The rate of PEs was three times higher in cases than in controls (incidence rate ratio = 3.0, 95% CI 2.3-4.0, P < .001).
Conclusions: Ward doctors can effectively identify patients with PEs, and thus at risk of medication-related harm, using clinical intuition.