Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Health-System Pharmacists
Pharmacists versus nonpharmacists in adverse drug event detection: A meta-analysis and systematic reviewSHOBHA PHANSALKAR, M.S., is Doctoral Candidate, Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City. JENNIFER M. HOFFMAN, PHARM.D., is Investigator, Salt Lake Informatics, Decision Enhancement, and Surveillance (IDEAS) Center, Salt Lake City. JONATHAN R. NEBEKER, M.D., M.S., is Assistant Professor, School of Medicine, University of Utah and IDEAS Center, George E. Wahlen Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Salt Lake City. JOHN F. HURDLE, M.D., PH.D., is Associate Professor, Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah. Address correspondence to Ms. Phansalkar at the Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah and Salt Lake Informatics, Decision Enhancement And Surveillance Center, George E. Wahlen Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, School of Medicine, 26 South 2000 East, Suite 5700 HSEB, Salt Lake City, UT 84132 (shobha.phansalkar{at}hsc.utah.edu).
Methods. A systematic review and metaanalysis of studies using chart review as the method of detection of ADEs were conducted. Pooled estimates of the ADE rates were calculated using the inverse variance weight method. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. Using the MannWhitney U test, weighted rates of studies in which pharmacists versus other clinicians were the chart reviewers were compared.
Results. Thirteen studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Using random effects metaanalysis, the mean of the weighted incidence rate detected by pharmacists was 0.33 ADE per admission (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.170.50); the mean was 0.16 ADE per admission (95% CI, 0.110.22) with detection by nonpharmacists. Significant heterogeneity was present between studies in both groups. A significant difference (p = 0.003) existed between the ADE rate reported by pharmacists (median = 0.23; interquartile range [IQR], 0.180.44) and that of nonpharmacists (median = 0.12; IQR, 0.020.49). Although there is overwhelming evidence of statistical heterogeneity, the numbers pertaining to the ADE rates detected by the two groups were large enough to indicate significant differences. Despite the heterogeneity, there is strong evidence that pharmacist-led interventions based on chart review report a higher ADE rate among inpatients.
Conclusion. A review of the literature revealed that pharmacists make a salient contribution as manual chart reviewers in inpatient ADE interventions.
Index terms: Drugs, adverse reactions; Hospitals; Interventions; Pharmacists, hospital; Records
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||