Marie Morris1, Allison W Willis1, Susan Searles Nielsen1, Franklin McCann1, Angela Birke1, Brad A Racette2. 1. From the Department of Neurology (M.M., A.B., B.A.R.), Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; Departments of Neurology and Biostatistics and Epidemiology (A.W.W.), Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA; Department of Neurology (S.S.N.), University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Barnes-Jewish Hospital (F.M.), St. Louis, MO; and School of Public Health (B.A.R.), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Parktown, South Africa. 2. From the Department of Neurology (M.M., A.B., B.A.R.), Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO; Departments of Neurology and Biostatistics and Epidemiology (A.W.W.), Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA; Department of Neurology (S.S.N.), University of Washington, Seattle, WA; Barnes-Jewish Hospital (F.M.), St. Louis, MO; and School of Public Health (B.A.R.), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Parktown, South Africa. racetteb@neuro.wustl.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the appropriateness of dopamine receptor antagonist prescriptions in hospitalized patients with dopamine-requiring diseases after implementation of an automated prescription alert system. METHODS: We examined dopamine receptor antagonist prescriptions in hospitalized patients with dopamine-requiring diseases and physician response to an automated drug contraindication alert system at Barnes-Jewish Hospital from 2009 to 2013. A detailed review of patient medical records was performed for all alert events generated when a physician prescribed a dopamine receptor antagonist concurrently with a dopamine receptor agonist in hospitalized patients. Two movement disorders neurologists determined the appropriateness of each prescription, based on patient medical history, through consensus. Physician response to alert was compared by indication for the prescription and physician specialty. RESULTS: Of 237 orders, 197 (83.1%) prescriptions for dopamine receptor antagonists were considered inappropriate. The prevalence of inappropriate dopamine receptor antagonist prescriptions per levodopa prescriptions was 16.10% (95% confidence interval 9.47, 22.73) in psychiatry, 7.51% (6.16, 8.86) in general medicine, 6.14% (4.49, 7.79) in the surgical specialties, and 0.85% (0.46, 1.25) in the neurologic/neurosurgical specialties. Of the inappropriate prescriptions, 146 (74.1%) were continued despite the alert. The strongest predictor of discontinuation of dopamine receptor antagonist medications was use of the medication to treat nausea or emesis (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite successfully identifying instances when dopamine antagonists were prescribed to patients with dopamine-requiring diseases, the alert system modestly affected physician prescribing behavior, highlighting the need for improved education of health care providers.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the appropriateness of dopamine receptor antagonist prescriptions in hospitalized patients with dopamine-requiring diseases after implementation of an automated prescription alert system. METHODS: We examined dopamine receptor antagonist prescriptions in hospitalized patients with dopamine-requiring diseases and physician response to an automated drug contraindication alert system at Barnes-Jewish Hospital from 2009 to 2013. A detailed review of patient medical records was performed for all alert events generated when a physician prescribed a dopamine receptor antagonist concurrently with a dopamine receptor agonist in hospitalized patients. Two movement disorders neurologists determined the appropriateness of each prescription, based on patient medical history, through consensus. Physician response to alert was compared by indication for the prescription and physician specialty. RESULTS: Of 237 orders, 197 (83.1%) prescriptions for dopamine receptor antagonists were considered inappropriate. The prevalence of inappropriate dopamine receptor antagonist prescriptions per levodopa prescriptions was 16.10% (95% confidence interval 9.47, 22.73) in psychiatry, 7.51% (6.16, 8.86) in general medicine, 6.14% (4.49, 7.79) in the surgical specialties, and 0.85% (0.46, 1.25) in the neurologic/neurosurgical specialties. Of the inappropriate prescriptions, 146 (74.1%) were continued despite the alert. The strongest predictor of discontinuation of dopamine receptor antagonist medications was use of the medication to treat nausea or emesis (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite successfully identifying instances when dopamine antagonists were prescribed to patients with dopamine-requiring diseases, the alert system modestly affected physician prescribing behavior, highlighting the need for improved education of health care providers.
Authors: Shobha Phansalkar; Heleen van der Sijs; Alisha D Tucker; Amrita A Desai; Douglas S Bell; Jonathan M Teich; Blackford Middleton; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-09-25 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: J M Miyasaki; K Shannon; V Voon; B Ravina; G Kleiner-Fisman; K Anderson; L M Shulman; G Gronseth; W J Weiner Journal: Neurology Date: 2006-04-11 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Alan Breier; Virginia K Sutton; Peter D Feldman; Deborah L Kadam; Iris Ferchland; Padraig Wright; Joseph H Friedman Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2002-09-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Daniel Riedmann; Martin Jung; Werner O Hackl; Wolf Stühlinger; Heleen van der Sijs; Elske Ammenwerth Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2011-05-25 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: James A G Crispo; Allison W Willis; Dylan P Thibault; Yannick Fortin; Harlen D Hays; Douglas S McNair; Lise M Bjerre; Dafna E Kohen; Santiago Perez-Lloret; Donald R Mattison; Daniel Krewski Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-03-03 Impact factor: 3.240