↓ Skip to main content

Can clinical practice indicator relating to long-acting benzodiazepine use in the elderly be easily generated in a hospital setting?

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Can clinical practice indicator relating to long-acting benzodiazepine use in the elderly be easily generated in a hospital setting?
Published in
European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00228-017-2371-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Badria Kadri, Antonio Teixeira, Christelle Duteil, Annabelle Tan, Hélène Barreteau, Christophe Segouin, Pénélope Troude

Abstract

To improve the appropriate use of long-acting benzodiazepine (la.bzd) prescriptions in the elderly, the Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS) has developed clinical practice indicators (CPI). The alert indicator (AI) evaluates the prevalence of la.bzd prescription among older people. The mastering indicator (MI) corresponds to the prevalence of elderly with a justified, i.e., appropriate, la.bzd prescription among all the elderly with la.bzd prescriptions. The objective of this study was to test the feasibility of routine generation of CPI regarding la.bzd prescriptions among the elderly in the hospital setting. This was a retrospective study. The study was conducted in two university hospitals located in Paris. Eligible cases were patients aged 65 years and older who were hospitalized in acute care units from January to June 2014. The AI calculation was based on information extracted from medical databases from these hospitals. The appropriateness of la.bzd prescription was assessed by a physician and a pharmacist and was based on review of computerized patient records and prescriptions, using an ad hoc algorithm. The MI was then calculated. Variation in the level of indicators was explored according to the characteristics of patients and of their hospitalization using chi(2) test. Factors associated with a potentially inappropriate prescription (PIP) of la.bzd were studied using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Among the 4167 patients included in the study, 362 had la.bzd prescriptions, i.e., the AI was 9%. Prescriptions were found to be appropriate for 83 patients, i.e., the MI was 23% and PIP was 77%. The MI varied between 13 and 31% according to characteristics of patients and of hospitalization. In multivariate analysis, factors associated with PIP were age, number of comorbidities, type of care unit, and concurrent prescription of a neuroleptic or hypnotic. Generation of the AI was routinely possible but only for acute care units with computerized prescriptions, corresponding to 78% of patients. Production of the MI has required medical record review for all patients with a la.bzd prescription and cannot be automated. However, difficulties in generating the MI have identified areas for significant improvement. Moreover, strategies to improve the care of older people with a la.bzd prescription could be targeted using characteristics of patients and of hospitalization associated with PIP. The future deployment of a single electronic medical record in all care departments would make it easier to mine the data and make possible automated production of CPI.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 16 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 16%
Psychology 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 17 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 March 2018.
All research outputs
#12,998,165
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
#1,841
of 2,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,958
of 294,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
#23
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,547 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.