↓ Skip to main content

The effect on potential adverse drug events of a pharmacist-acquired medication history in an emergency department: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, parallel-group study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effect on potential adverse drug events of a pharmacist-acquired medication history in an emergency department: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, parallel-group study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-0990-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jesus Becerra-Camargo, Fernando Martínez-Martínez, Emilio García-Jiménez

Abstract

Potential adverse drug events (PADEs) are defined as being potentially harmful unintentional medication discrepancies. Discrepancies regarding medication history (MH) often occur when a patient is being admitted to a hospital's emergency department (ED); they are clinically important and represent a significant source of data regarding adverse drug events occurring during emergency admission to hospital. This study sought to measure the impact of pharmacist-acquired MH during admission to an ED; it focused on whether a patient's current home medication regimen being available for a doctor when consulting a patient in an ED would have reduced potential adverse drug events. A multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled parallel-group study was carried out at 3 large teaching hospitals in Bogota, Colombia. Two hundred and seventy patients who had been admitted to an ED were enrolled; each had a standardised, comprehensive MH interview, focusing on a patient's current home medication regimen prior to being seen by a doctor. Data recorded on the admission medication order form was available to be used by a doctor during consultation in the ED. The main outcome dealt with comparing the intervention and control groups regarding the percentage of patients having at least 1 potential adverse drug event. There were 811 PADE (3.35 per patient), 528 (65 %) on the standard care arm and 283 (35 %) on an intervention arm. Most PADEs were judged to have had the potential to cause moderate discomfort (42.6 %), 33.4 % were deemed unlikely to have caused harm and 23.9 % were judged to have had the potential to cause clinical deterioration. Many patients suffer potentially adverse drugs events during the transition of care from home to a hospital. Patient safety-focused medication reconciliation during admission to an ED involving a pharmacist and drawing up a history of complete medication could contribute towards reducing the risk of PADES occurring and improve follow-up of patients' medication-based therapy. 28/10/2012, ISRCTN63455839 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 149 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 16%
Student > Bachelor 20 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Other 10 7%
Other 30 20%
Unknown 38 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 37 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 12%
Psychology 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 12 8%
Unknown 44 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2017.
All research outputs
#13,104,973
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,386
of 7,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,334
of 265,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#76
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,640 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.