OBJECTIVE: This study sought to determine whether a computerized tool that alerted pharmacists when pregnant patients were prescribedU.S. Food and Drug Administration pregnancy risk category D or X medications was effective in decreasing dispensings of these medications. DESIGN: Randomized trial. Pharmacy, diagnostic, and laboratory data were linked to identify pregnant patients prescribed targeted medications. Women (n = 11,100) were randomized to intervention or usual care. Physicians and pharmacists collaborated on the intervention. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the proportion of pregnant women dispensed a category D or X medication. The secondary outcome was the total number of first dispensings of targeted medications. RESULTS: A total of 2.9% of intervention (n = 177) and 5.5% of usual care (n = 276) patients were dispensed targeted medications (p < 0.001): 1.8% of intervention (n = 108) and 3.9% of usual care (n = 198) patients were dispensed only category D medication(s); 0.9% of intervention (n = 54) and 1.2% of usual care (n = 58) patients were dispensed only category X medication(s); 0.2% of intervention (n = 15) and 0.4% of usual care (n = 20) patients were dispensed both category D and X medications (p = 0.05). This resulted in intervention patients receiving 238 dispensings of unique targeted medications and usual care patients receiving 361 dispensings of unique targeted medications (p = 0.03). The study was stopped primarily due to 2 false-positive alert types: Misidentification of medications as contraindicated in pregnancy by the pharmacy information system and misidentification of pregnancy related to delayed transfer of diagnosis information. CONCLUSION: Coupling data from information systems with knowledge and skills of physicians and pharmacists resulted in improved prescribing safety. Systems limitations contributed to project discontinuation. Linking ambulatory clinical, laboratory, and pharmacy information to provide safety alerts is not sufficient to ensure project success and sustainability.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to determine whether a computerized tool that alerted pharmacists when pregnant patients were prescribed U.S. Food and Drug Administration pregnancy risk category D or X medications was effective in decreasing dispensings of these medications. DESIGN: Randomized trial. Pharmacy, diagnostic, and laboratory data were linked to identify pregnant patients prescribed targeted medications. Women (n = 11,100) were randomized to intervention or usual care. Physicians and pharmacists collaborated on the intervention. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the proportion of pregnant women dispensed a category D or X medication. The secondary outcome was the total number of first dispensings of targeted medications. RESULTS: A total of 2.9% of intervention (n = 177) and 5.5% of usual care (n = 276) patients were dispensed targeted medications (p < 0.001): 1.8% of intervention (n = 108) and 3.9% of usual care (n = 198) patients were dispensed only category D medication(s); 0.9% of intervention (n = 54) and 1.2% of usual care (n = 58) patients were dispensed only category X medication(s); 0.2% of intervention (n = 15) and 0.4% of usual care (n = 20) patients were dispensed both category D and X medications (p = 0.05). This resulted in intervention patients receiving 238 dispensings of unique targeted medications and usual care patients receiving 361 dispensings of unique targeted medications (p = 0.03). The study was stopped primarily due to 2 false-positive alert types: Misidentification of medications as contraindicated in pregnancy by the pharmacy information system and misidentification of pregnancy related to delayed transfer of diagnosis information. CONCLUSION: Coupling data from information systems with knowledge and skills of physicians and pharmacists resulted in improved prescribing safety. Systems limitations contributed to project discontinuation. Linking ambulatory clinical, laboratory, and pharmacy information to provide safety alerts is not sufficient to ensure project success and sustainability.
Authors: Tejal K Gandhi; Saul N Weingart; Joshua Borus; Andrew C Seger; Josh Peterson; Elisabeth Burdick; Diane L Seger; Kirstin Shu; Frank Federico; Lucian L Leape; David W Bates Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-04-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Susan E Andrade; Jerry H Gurwitz; Robert L Davis; K Arnold Chan; Jonathan A Finkelstein; Kris Fortman; Heather McPhillips; Marsha A Raebel; Douglas Roblin; David H Smith; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Abraham N Morse; Richard Platt Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Brian L Strom; Rita Schinnar; Joshua Jones; Warren B Bilker; Mark G Weiner; Sean Hennessy; Charles E Leonard; Peter F Cronholm; Eric Pifer Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Brian L Strom; Rita Schinnar; Warren Bilker; Sean Hennessy; Charles E Leonard; Eric Pifer Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Eleanor Bimla Schwarz; Sara M Parisi; Steven M Handler; Gideon Koren; Elan D Cohen; Grant J Shevchik; Gary S Fischer Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: K Ann McKibbon; Cynthia Lokker; Steven M Handler; Lisa R Dolovich; Anne M Holbrook; Daria O'Reilly; Robyn Tamblyn; Brian J Hemens; Runki Basu; Sue Troyan; Pavel S Roshanov Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2011-08-18 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Eleanor Bimla Schwarz; Sara M Parisi; Steven M Handler; Gideon Koren; Grant Shevchik; Gary S Fischer Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2013-08-09 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Brian J Hemens; Anne Holbrook; Marita Tonkin; Jean A Mackay; Lorraine Weise-Kelly; Tamara Navarro; Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2011-08-03 Impact factor: 7.327