| Title |
Medication administration via enteral feeding tube: a survey of pharmacists’ knowledge
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-015-0196-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elke Joos, Stacey Verbeke, Els Mehuys, Jan Van Bocxlaer, Jean Paul Remon, Myriam Van Winckel, Koen Boussery |
| Abstract |
Background Medication administration to patients with an enteral feeding tube (EFT) is complex and prone to errors. Community pharmacists may be ideally placed to provide training and advice on this topic in individual patients as well as in institutions supplied by the pharmacy. Objective To assess community pharmacists' knowledge on guideline recommendations regarding medication preparation and administration through EFT. Method Knowledge of guideline recommendations was assessed using a 15-item self-administered online questionnaire (April-June 2014). Questions reflected key aspects of guideline recommendations on medication administration via EFT. All graduated community pharmacists from the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium were eligible for participation. Results A total of 105 community pharmacists completed the questionnaire. Median self-perceived knowledge of medication administration via EFT was 2 (on a 0-10 scale). On average 5.2 (SD 2.6) out of the 15 questions were answered correctly. Strikingly, the ability to select suspensions in a list of liquid medications and knowledge on crushability of solid dosage forms were low. Conclusion Our findings demonstrate that pharmacists' knowledge on correct medication administration via EFT is too limited to be able to provide good advice to EFT patients or their caregivers. Tailored training on this topic is needed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 13 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 18 | 26% |
| Unspecified | 13 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 16 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,333,181
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#1,023
of 1,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,250
of 279,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#21
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,091 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 279,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.