Kilbridge Peter M, Campbell Udobi C, Cozart Heidi B, Mojarrad Maryam G
Duke Health Technology Solutions, Duke University Health System, Box 2718, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 Jul-Aug;13(4):372-7. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2069. Epub 2006 Apr 18.
To compare the rates and nature of ADEs at an academic medical center and a community hospital using a single computerized ADE surveillance system.
Prospective cohort study of patients admitted to two tertiary care hospitals. Outcome Measure Adverse drug events identified by automated surveillance and voluntary reporting.
We implemented an automated surveillance system across an academic medical center and a community hospital. Potential events identified by the computer were reviewed in detail by medication safety pharmacists and scored for causality and severity. Findings were compared between the two hospitals, and with voluntary reports from nurses and pharmacists.
Over the 8 month study period, 25,177 patients were admitted to the university hospital and 8,029 to the community hospital. There were 1,116 ADEs in 900 patients at the university hospital for an overall rate of 4.4 ADEs per 100 admissions. At the community hospital, 399 patients experienced 501 ADEs for a rate of 6.2 events per 100 admissions. Rates of antibiotic-associated colitis, drug-induced hypoglycemia, and anticoagulation-related ADEs were significantly higher at the community hospital compared with the university hospital. Computerized surveillance detected ADEs at a rate 3.6 times that of voluntary reporting at the university hospital and 12.3 times that at the community hospital.
Operation of a common automated ADE surveillance system across hospitals permits meaningful comparison of ADE rates in different inpatient settings. Automated surveillance detects ADEs at rates far higher than voluntary reporting, and the difference may be greater in the community hospital setting. Community hospitals may experience higher rates of certain types of ADEs compared with academic medical centers.
使用单一的计算机化药物不良反应监测系统,比较一所学术医疗中心和一家社区医院的药物不良反应发生率及性质。
对两家三级护理医院收治的患者进行前瞻性队列研究。结局指标通过自动监测和自愿报告识别的药物不良事件。
我们在一所学术医疗中心和一家社区医院实施了自动监测系统。由计算机识别出的潜在事件由药物安全药师进行详细审查,并对因果关系和严重程度进行评分。比较了两家医院的结果,并与护士和药师的自愿报告进行了对比。
在8个月的研究期间,大学医院收治了25177例患者,社区医院收治了8029例患者。大学医院900例患者发生了1116起药物不良反应,每100例入院患者的总体发生率为4.4起药物不良反应。在社区医院,399例患者发生了501起药物不良反应,每100例入院患者的发生率为6.2起事件。与大学医院相比,社区医院抗生素相关性结肠炎、药物性低血糖和抗凝相关药物不良反应的发生率显著更高。计算机化监测在大学医院检测到药物不良反应的速率是自愿报告的3.6倍,在社区医院是12.3倍。
跨医院运行通用的自动药物不良反应监测系统能够对不同住院环境下的药物不良反应发生率进行有意义的比较。自动监测检测到药物不良反应的速率远高于自愿报告,且在社区医院环境中差异可能更大。与学术医疗中心相比,社区医院某些类型的药物不良反应发生率可能更高。