Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per monograph and for the rest of the world £3 per monograph.You can order HTA monographs from our Despatch Agents:-fax (with credit card or official purchase order) -post (with credit card or official purchase order or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you either to pay securely by credit card or to print out your order and then post or fax it. Contact details are as follows: Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to Direct Mail Works Ltd and drawn on a bank with a UK address. Paying by credit cardThe following cards are accepted by phone, fax, post or via the website ordering pages: Delta, Eurocard, Mastercard, Solo, Switch and Visa. We advise against sending credit card details in a plain email. Paying by official purchase orderYou can post or fax these, but they must be from public bodies (i.e. NHS or universities) within the UK.We cannot at present accept purchase orders from commercial companies or from outside the UK. How do I get a copy of HTA on CD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd.htm). Or contact Direct Mail Works (see contact details above) by email, post, fax or phone. HTA on CD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA Programme and lists the membership of the various committees. HTAStepped treatment of older adults on laxatives. The STOOL trial NIHR Health Technology Assessment ProgrammeT he Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care. The research findings from the HTA Programme directly influence decision-making bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the National Screening Committee (NSC). HTA findings also help to improve the quality of clinical practice in the NHS indirectly in that they form a key component of the 'National Knowledge Service'. The HTA Programme is needs-led in that it fills gaps in the evidence needed by the NHS. There are three routes to the start of projects. First is the commissioned route. Suggestions for research are actively sought from people working in the NHS, the public and consumer groups and professional bodies such as royal colleges and NHS trusts. These suggestions are carefully prioritised by panels of independent experts (including NHS service users). The HTA Programme then commissions the research by competitive tender. Secondly, the HTA Programme provides grants for clinical trials for researchers who identify...

Objectives To assess the incidence of prescribing errors, predict patient outcome from clinical pharmacists' recommendations made in response to identified prescribing errors, and evaluate the influence of clinical pharmacists on recommendation implementation. Method Clinical pharmacy activities were conducted on two wards, one of which had an existing clinical pharmacy service (intervention ward) while the other did not (control ward). For the control ward, prescribing errors were documented but not followed up unless a potentially life‐threatening problem was identified. Prescribing errors were identified and recommendations made by pharmacists. A consultant physician and pharmacist conducted an independent, blinded assessment of these recommendations to predict the impact on patient outcome if implemented. Recommendations were communicated to medical staff or implemented by the pharmacist on the intervention ward only. The proportion of recommendations implemented for intervention and control group patients were recorded. Setting Two medical wards in a UK district general hospital. The study was carried out over 12 weeks. Key findings There were 740 errors recorded for 235 patients. Fourteen recommendations could not be assessed. For all recommendations, the consultant and pharmacist predicted patient outcomes with life‐saving (one consultant vs three pharmacist), major (186 vs 318), minor (328 vs 324), neutral (211 vs 85) or harmful (five vs five) impact respectively. For the intervention group, 79% of recommendations were implemented, including 81 of 92 (88%) predicted by the consultant to have major impact on patient outcomes. In the control group, only 18% of recommendations were spontaneously implemented, including only 10 of 94 (11%) recommendations predicted by the consultant to have major impact. Conclusion Ward‐based clinical pharmacists identified large numbers of prescribing errors and made clinically significant recommendations. Implementation of recommendations was predicted to improve the outcome of patient care. Further research, specifically assessing the outcome of pharmacists' recommendations on patient care, is warranted.

Without a placebo control, no efficacy conclusions are possible. Subgroups at higher risk of death were identified, and the change in protein C level from baseline was predictive of survival. The most significant complication observed was bleeding. Risk factors for serious bleeding appear to be multiple organ failure, thrombocytopenia, and coagulopathy.