@article{beeler_use_2013,
	title = {Use of an on-demand drug-drug interaction checker by prescribers and consultants: a retrospective analysis in a {Swiss} teaching hospital},
	volume = {36},
	issn = {0114-5916},
	shorttitle = {Use of an on-demand drug-drug interaction checker by prescribers and consultants},
	doi = {10.1007/s40264-013-0022-1},
	abstract = {BACKGROUND: Offering a drug-drug interaction (DDI) checker on-demand instead of computer-triggered alerts is a strategy to avoid alert fatigue.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose was to determine the use of such an on-demand tool, implemented in the clinical information system for inpatients.
METHODS: The study was conducted at the University Hospital Zurich, an 850-bed teaching hospital. The hospital-wide use of the on-demand DDI checker was measured for prescribers and consulting pharmacologists. The number of DDIs identified on-demand was compared to the number that would have resulted by computer-triggering and this was compared to patient-specific recommendations by a consulting pharmacist.
RESULTS: The on-demand use was analyzed during treatment of 64,259 inpatients with 1,316,884 prescriptions. The DDI checker was popular with nine consulting pharmacologists (648 checks/consultant). A total of 644 prescribing physicians used it infrequently (eight checks/prescriber). Among prescribers, internists used the tool most frequently and obtained higher numbers of DDIs per check (1.7) compared to surgeons (0.4). A total of 16,553 DDIs were identified on-demand, i.e., {\textless}10 \% of the number the computer would have triggered (169,192). A pharmacist visiting 922 patients on a medical ward recommended 128 adjustments to prevent DDIs (0.14 recommendations/patient), and 76 \% of them were applied by prescribers. In contrast, computer-triggering the DDI checker would have resulted in 45 times more alerts on this ward (6.3 alerts/patient).
CONCLUSIONS: The on-demand DDI checker was popular with the consultants only. However, prescribers accepted 76 \% of patient-specific recommendations by a pharmacist. The prescribers' limited on-demand use indicates the necessity for developing improved safety concepts, tailored to suit these consumers. Thus, different approaches have to satisfy different target groups.},
	language = {eng},
	number = {6},
	journal = {Drug safety: an international journal of medical toxicology and drug experience},
	author = {Beeler, Patrick Emanuel and Eschmann, Emmanuel and Rosen, Christoph and Blaser, Jürg},
	month = jun,
	year = {2013},
	pmid = {23516005},
	keywords = {Attitude of Health Personnel, Databases, Pharmaceutical, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Drug Interactions, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions, Hospitals, Teaching, Humans, Information Seeking Behavior, Internal Medicine, Medical Errors, Mental Fatigue, Pharmacology, Clinical, Physicians, Retrospective Studies, Software, Specialties, Surgical, Switzerland},
	pages = {427--434}
}

{"_id":"7ABxCoJcArGoPFB8b","bibbaseid":"beeler-eschmann-rosen-blaser-useofanondemanddrugdruginteractioncheckerbyprescribersandconsultantsaretrospectiveanalysisinaswissteachinghospital-2013","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2018-12-05T13:23:20.175Z","title":"Use of an on-demand drug-drug interaction checker by prescribers and consultants: a retrospective analysis in a Swiss teaching hospital","author_short":["Beeler, P. E.","Eschmann, E.","Rosen, C.","Blaser, J."],"year":2013,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/emmanuel.chazard","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Use of an on-demand drug-drug interaction checker by prescribers and consultants: a retrospective analysis in a Swiss teaching hospital","volume":"36","issn":"0114-5916","shorttitle":"Use of an on-demand drug-drug interaction checker by prescribers and consultants","doi":"10.1007/s40264-013-0022-1","abstract":"BACKGROUND: Offering a drug-drug interaction (DDI) checker on-demand instead of computer-triggered alerts is a strategy to avoid alert fatigue. OBJECTIVE: The purpose was to determine the use of such an on-demand tool, implemented in the clinical information system for inpatients. METHODS: The study was conducted at the University Hospital Zurich, an 850-bed teaching hospital. The hospital-wide use of the on-demand DDI checker was measured for prescribers and consulting pharmacologists. The number of DDIs identified on-demand was compared to the number that would have resulted by computer-triggering and this was compared to patient-specific recommendations by a consulting pharmacist. RESULTS: The on-demand use was analyzed during treatment of 64,259 inpatients with 1,316,884 prescriptions. The DDI checker was popular with nine consulting pharmacologists (648 checks/consultant). A total of 644 prescribing physicians used it infrequently (eight checks/prescriber). Among prescribers, internists used the tool most frequently and obtained higher numbers of DDIs per check (1.7) compared to surgeons (0.4). A total of 16,553 DDIs were identified on-demand, i.e., \\textless10 % of the number the computer would have triggered (169,192). A pharmacist visiting 922 patients on a medical ward recommended 128 adjustments to prevent DDIs (0.14 recommendations/patient), and 76 % of them were applied by prescribers. In contrast, computer-triggering the DDI checker would have resulted in 45 times more alerts on this ward (6.3 alerts/patient). CONCLUSIONS: The on-demand DDI checker was popular with the consultants only. However, prescribers accepted 76 % of patient-specific recommendations by a pharmacist. The prescribers' limited on-demand use indicates the necessity for developing improved safety concepts, tailored to suit these consumers. Thus, different approaches have to satisfy different target groups.","language":"eng","number":"6","journal":"Drug safety: an international journal of medical toxicology and drug experience","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Beeler"],"firstnames":["Patrick","Emanuel"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Eschmann"],"firstnames":["Emmanuel"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Rosen"],"firstnames":["Christoph"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Blaser"],"firstnames":["Jürg"],"suffixes":[]}],"month":"June","year":"2013","pmid":"23516005","keywords":"Attitude of Health Personnel, Databases, Pharmaceutical, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Drug Interactions, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions, Hospitals, Teaching, Humans, Information Seeking Behavior, Internal Medicine, Medical Errors, Mental Fatigue, Pharmacology, Clinical, Physicians, Retrospective Studies, Software, Specialties, Surgical, Switzerland","pages":"427–434","bibtex":"@article{beeler_use_2013,\n\ttitle = {Use of an on-demand drug-drug interaction checker by prescribers and consultants: a retrospective analysis in a {Swiss} teaching hospital},\n\tvolume = {36},\n\tissn = {0114-5916},\n\tshorttitle = {Use of an on-demand drug-drug interaction checker by prescribers and consultants},\n\tdoi = {10.1007/s40264-013-0022-1},\n\tabstract = {BACKGROUND: Offering a drug-drug interaction (DDI) checker on-demand instead of computer-triggered alerts is a strategy to avoid alert fatigue.\nOBJECTIVE: The purpose was to determine the use of such an on-demand tool, implemented in the clinical information system for inpatients.\nMETHODS: The study was conducted at the University Hospital Zurich, an 850-bed teaching hospital. The hospital-wide use of the on-demand DDI checker was measured for prescribers and consulting pharmacologists. The number of DDIs identified on-demand was compared to the number that would have resulted by computer-triggering and this was compared to patient-specific recommendations by a consulting pharmacist.\nRESULTS: The on-demand use was analyzed during treatment of 64,259 inpatients with 1,316,884 prescriptions. The DDI checker was popular with nine consulting pharmacologists (648 checks/consultant). A total of 644 prescribing physicians used it infrequently (eight checks/prescriber). Among prescribers, internists used the tool most frequently and obtained higher numbers of DDIs per check (1.7) compared to surgeons (0.4). A total of 16,553 DDIs were identified on-demand, i.e., {\\textless}10 \\% of the number the computer would have triggered (169,192). A pharmacist visiting 922 patients on a medical ward recommended 128 adjustments to prevent DDIs (0.14 recommendations/patient), and 76 \\% of them were applied by prescribers. In contrast, computer-triggering the DDI checker would have resulted in 45 times more alerts on this ward (6.3 alerts/patient).\nCONCLUSIONS: The on-demand DDI checker was popular with the consultants only. However, prescribers accepted 76 \\% of patient-specific recommendations by a pharmacist. The prescribers' limited on-demand use indicates the necessity for developing improved safety concepts, tailored to suit these consumers. Thus, different approaches have to satisfy different target groups.},\n\tlanguage = {eng},\n\tnumber = {6},\n\tjournal = {Drug safety: an international journal of medical toxicology and drug experience},\n\tauthor = {Beeler, Patrick Emanuel and Eschmann, Emmanuel and Rosen, Christoph and Blaser, Jürg},\n\tmonth = jun,\n\tyear = {2013},\n\tpmid = {23516005},\n\tkeywords = {Attitude of Health Personnel, Databases, Pharmaceutical, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Drug Interactions, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions, Hospitals, Teaching, Humans, Information Seeking Behavior, Internal Medicine, Medical Errors, Mental Fatigue, Pharmacology, Clinical, Physicians, Retrospective Studies, Software, Specialties, Surgical, Switzerland},\n\tpages = {427--434}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Beeler, P. E.","Eschmann, E.","Rosen, C.","Blaser, J."],"key":"beeler_use_2013","id":"beeler_use_2013","bibbaseid":"beeler-eschmann-rosen-blaser-useofanondemanddrugdruginteractioncheckerbyprescribersandconsultantsaretrospectiveanalysisinaswissteachinghospital-2013","role":"author","urls":{},"keyword":["Attitude of Health Personnel","Databases","Pharmaceutical","Decision Support Systems","Clinical","Drug Interactions","Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions","Hospitals","Teaching","Humans","Information Seeking Behavior","Internal Medicine","Medical Errors","Mental Fatigue","Pharmacology","Clinical","Physicians","Retrospective Studies","Software","Specialties","Surgical","Switzerland"],"downloads":0},"search_terms":["use","demand","drug","drug","interaction","checker","prescribers","consultants","retrospective","analysis","swiss","teaching","hospital","beeler","eschmann","rosen","blaser"],"keywords":["attitude of health personnel","databases","pharmaceutical","decision support systems","clinical","drug interactions","drug-related side effects and adverse reactions","hospitals","teaching","humans","information seeking behavior","internal medicine","medical errors","mental fatigue","pharmacology","clinical","physicians","retrospective studies","software","specialties","surgical","switzerland"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["XiRGowmyYWQpwjiC9"]}