• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Fri, 22.11.24

Search results


May 2014
Yael Zenziper BPharm, Daniel Kurnik MD, Noa Markovits MD, Amitai Ziv MD MHA, Ari Shamiss MD MPA, Hillel Halkin MD and Ronen Loebstein MD

Background: Prescription errors are common in hospitalized patients and result in significant morbidity, mortality and costs. Electronic prescriptions with computerized physician order entry systems (CPOE) and integrated computerized decision support systems (CDSS providing online alerts) reduce prescription errors by approximately 50%. However, the introduction of CDSS is often met by opposition due to the flood of alerts, and most prescribers eventually ignore even crucial alerts (“alert fatigue”). 

Objectives: To describe the implementation and customization of a commercial CDSS (SafeRx®) for electronic prescribing in Internal Medicine departments at a tertiary care center, with the purpose of improving comprehensibility and substantially reducing the number of alerts to minimize alert fatigue. 

Methods: A multidisciplinary expert committee was authorized by the hospital administration to customize the CDSS according to the needs of six internal medicine departments at Sheba Medical Center. We assessed volume of prescriptions and alert types during the period February–August 2012 using the statistical functions provided by the CDSS. 

Results: A mean of 339 ± 13 patients per month per department received 11.2 ± 0.5 prescriptions per patient, 30.1% of which triggered one or more CDSS alerts, most commonly drug-drug interactions (43.2%) and dosing alerts (38.3%). The review committee silenced or modified 3981 alerts, enhancing comprehensibility, and providing dosing instructions adjusted to the patient’s renal function and recommendations for follow-up. 

Conclusions: The large volume of drug prescriptions in internal medicine departments is associated with a significant rate of potential prescription errors. To ensure its effectiveness and minimize alert fatigue, continuous customization of the CDSS to the specific needs of particular departments is required.

 

May 2012
Y. Gofin, A. Afek, E. Derazne, A. Toker and A. Shamiss

Background: The medical workforce shortage worldwide varies for different residencies.

Objectives: To determine future gaps in medical specialties in Israel by means of a model and to identify trends and considerations among medical students when they choose their residencies.

Methods: The gap (Gi) assessment model was based upon current demand (Di) and existing (Ei) status for each residency, using the formula [Gi=(Di-Ei)/Ei]. Ei represented the proportion of specific residencies in 2006–2010 out of all Israeli residency graduates and Di was based upon questionnaires filled out by medical students at Sackler and Hadassah medical schools in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem respectively (N=909).

Results: The largest relative shortages (Gi ranges from -1 to 1) were in Pathology (G=-1), Rehabilitation Medicine (-0.9), Radiology (-0.8), General Practice (-0.8) and Anesthesiology (-0.8). The highest relative demands were in Surgical subspecialties (2.9) and Obstetrics/Gynecology (OB/GYN) (1.6). More females than males chose residencies in OB/GYN (19.5% vs. 7.1%, P < 0.001) and pediatrics (28.1% vs. 15.4%, P < 0.001). Surgery subspecialties (9% vs. 23.7%, P < 0.001) were male-predominant. The workload consideration was rated higher among females, while income was rated higher among males. Among students in clinical years, compared to pre-clinical, there was a decline in the selection of some professions, including Surgical subspecialties (9.7% vs. 19.5%, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: The suggested model, based on a survey of demand and current or projected future needs, can be used to assess gaps and plan early interventions. Programs at the level of medical school may affect residency preferences. The decline in selection of surgical professions and the increasing workload as a consideration for residency choice should be given attention.

 


June 2010
R. Beigel, D. Oieru, O. Goitein, P. Chouraqui, M.S. Feinberg, S. Brosh, E. Asher, E. Konen, A. Shamiss, M. Eldar, H. Hod, J. Or and S. Matetzky

Background: Many patients present to the emergency department with chest pain. While in most of them chest pain represents a benign complaint, in some patients it underlies a life-threatening illness.

Objectives: To assess the routine evaluation of patients presenting to the ED[1] with acute chest pain via the utilization of a cardiologist-based chest pain unit using different non-invasive imaging modalities.

Methods: We evaluated the records of 1055 consecutive patients who presented to the ED with complaints of chest pain and were admitted to the CPU[2]. After an observation period and according to the decision of the attending cardiologist, patients underwent myocardial perfusion scintigraphy, multidetector computed tomography, or stress echocardiography.

Results: The CPU attending cardiologist did not prescribe non-invasive evaluation for 108 of the 1055 patients, who were either admitted (58 patients) or discharged (50 patients) after an observation period. Of those remaining, 445 patients underwent MDCT[3], 444 MPS[4], and 58 stress echocardiography. Altogether, 907 patients (86%) were discharged from the CPU. During an average period of 236 ± 223 days, 25 patients (3.1%) were readmitted due to chest pain of suspected cardiac origin, and only 8 patients (0.9%) suffered a major adverse cardiovascular event.

Conclusions: Utilization of the CPU enabled a rapid and thorough evaluation of the patients’ primary complaint, thereby reducing hospitalization costs and occupancy on the one hand and avoiding misdiagnosis in discharged patients on the other.

 

[1] ED = emergency department

[2] CPU = chest pain unit

[3] MDCT = multidetector computed tomography

[4] MPS = myocardial perfusion scintigraphy

Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel