ArticleBMC health services research2024
Health professionals' experience and perceived obstacles with managing patients' medication information in Norway: cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccess to correct and up to date medication information is crucial for effective patient treatment. However, persistent discrepancies exist. This study examines the experiences and challenges health professionals encounter while utilizing current digital solutions in the Norwegian healthcare system to manage patients' medication information.
methodsA cross-sectional descriptive analysis using quantitative survey data was conducted to investigate how health professionals managed patients' medication information. Content analysis was used to analyze free-text responses concerning challenges they encountered when transferring medication information and to identify factors deemed necessary for implementing the Shared Medication List in Norway.
resultsA total of 262 doctors and 244 nurses responded to the survey. A higher percentage of doctors (72.2%) expressed concerns regarding obtaining accurate and updated medication lists than nurses (42.9%), particularly for patients with polypharmacy (35.3%) or transitioning between primary and specialist care services (27.6%). The patient's verbal information was the main source for hospital doctors (17%) to obtain an overview of the patient's medication usage, while general practitioners (19%) and nurses (working in both primary and specialist care services, 28% and 27% respectively) predominantly relied on electronic prescriptions. Doctors, in particular general practitioners, reported carrying excessive responsibilities in coordinating with other health actors (84.8%) and managing patients' medication information. The vast majority of both doctors (84.4%) and nurses (82.0%) were in favor of a Shared Medication List. However, about a third of doctors (36.3%) and nurses (29.8%) expressed the need for a more balanced responsibility in updating and managing patients' medication information, while ensuring compatibility with existing digital systems.
conclusionsFragmented resources for medication information and unclear responsibilities were prevalent concerns among both professional groups. Doctors voiced more concern than nurses about the accuracy of patients' medication list. While both groups are positive about a shared medication list, successful implementation requires proactive training initiatives and clearer role clarification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.