1990
DOI: 10.1177/009286159002400309
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effectiveness of Computerized Drug Interaction Screening Programs in Hospitals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2006
2006

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Previous studies have found discrepancies in DDI references and computerized screening systems with respect to classifying the severity of DDIs. 5,8 More recently, Abarca et al found practically no agreement between 4 commonly used DDI references with regard to the classification of the severity of interactions considered to be of highest clinical importance. 7 Armstrong and Denemark evaluated pharmacists' responses to drug utilization review (DUR) alerts, which included DDI alerts, in a Medicaid population.…”
Section: ■■ Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies have found discrepancies in DDI references and computerized screening systems with respect to classifying the severity of DDIs. 5,8 More recently, Abarca et al found practically no agreement between 4 commonly used DDI references with regard to the classification of the severity of interactions considered to be of highest clinical importance. 7 Armstrong and Denemark evaluated pharmacists' responses to drug utilization review (DUR) alerts, which included DDI alerts, in a Medicaid population.…”
Section: ■■ Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Proprietary pharmacy systems exist that perform this function, but require that all of a patient's prescriptions be filled at the same pharmacy or chain. Many software programs are commercially available and have been reviewed in the literature, [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] but these have not become widely used in the emergency department (ED).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%