Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Biomed Inform. 2003 Feb-Apr;36(1-2):92-8.

A tiered approach is more cost effective than traditional pharmacist-based review for classifying computer-detected signals as adverse drug events.

Author information

1
Regenstrief Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, 1050 Wishard Boulevard, Indianapolis, IN 46202-2872, USA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To develop a cost-efficient method for identifying adverse drug events (ADEs) and medication errors (MEs) identified using outpatient electronic medical records within ambulatory settings.

DESIGN:

Comparison of sensitivity and cost of "traditional" pharmacist based approach to identifying ADEs and MEs during a 4 month period with a tiered approach.

RESULTS:

The proportion of computer generated signals analyzed identified as ADEs were similar using the two approaches while the number of MEs was nearly double with tiered reviews suggesting the same or better sensitivity. Traditional pharmacist review cost $68.70 US dollars to detect an ADE and tiered approach cost only $42.40.

CONCLUSION:

Tiered review of ADEs and MEs by personnel with increasing clinical capability is more cost-efficient than pharmacist review.

PMID:
14552850
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center