PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R M Coley

Publications and source records attributed to R M Coley.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1994

Assessing the accuracy of drug information responses from drug information centers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of response to a request among a sample of drug information centers and to determine the association between accuracy of response and individual center characteristics. DESIGN: A randomized telephone investigation. SETTING: College of Pharmacy drug information center located in a 500-bed tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-nine drug information centers randomly selected from 154 centers that had responded to a survey. INTERVENTION: Each center received a telephone request requiring identification of Videx (didanosine), at that time a Phase II investigational product. Each center correctly identifying Videx was presented a patient case and questioned concerning adverse effect management. A written protocol of conversation was followed. Center confidentiality was maintained during data analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The association between correct information regarding Videx and individual drug information center characteristics was evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-six evaluable responses were received. Videx was correctly identified by 16 centers (28.6 percent). Two centers (3.6 percent) made an incorrect identification and 38 centers (67.9 percent) could not make an identification. Of the 16 centers correctly identifying Videx, four successfully linked the product with described adverse effects, but none offered therapeutic management recommendations. Factors significantly associated with accurately identifying Videx included possession of a center policy and procedure manual (p = 0.011) and on-line searching capability (p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: These results identify an inconsistency in accuracy of responses among drug information centers. Although standardized operating policies/procedures and on-line searching capability may contribute to increased accuracy, there is clearly a need for enhanced quality assurance efforts.

Didanosine↗
PubMed1994

Evaluating the accuracy of citations in drug promotional brochures.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of statements cited in 3 x 5 inch promotional cards for the 50 most frequently prescribed drugs. MEASUREMENTS: The 50 most frequently prescribed drugs were identified in the April 1992 issue of Pharmacy Times. File cards were requested from the pharmaceutical companies. References in the file card were retrieved and cited statements identified. Criteria used to evaluate reference accuracy were: type of study design, use of peer review journals, retrievability of references in area libraries, and reference documentation as no error, major error, or minor error. Referenced statements were classified as correct, incorrect, misleading, or taken from the abstract, discussion, or conclusion section of a study. RESULTS: Of the 50 most frequently prescribed products, 21 file cards were obtained. One hundred forty-two cited references were retrieved (average +/- SD per file card 6.9 +/- 8.4). Three hundred thirty-four cited statements were verified (average per file card 15.9 +/- 24.7). Forty-two percent of references were human controlled trials, 17 percent not available, 11 percent review articles, 10 percent manufacturer information, 8 percent human uncontrolled, 4 percent nonhuman controlled, 3 percent retrospective, 2 percent tertiary literature, 1 percent epidemiologic studies, 1 percent prospective, and 1 percent editorial. Thirty-three percent of references were found in peer-review journals. Of all cited references, 73 percent were retrievable. Thirty-nine references were not retrievable: 24 were not held by local libraries and 15 were manufacturers' information. Eighty-five percent of references contained no errors in reference documentation. For accuracy of statements, 46.1 percent were correct, 29 percent not available, 15.3 percent misleading, 4.2 percent incorrect, and 5.4 percent were cited from the abstract, discussion, or conclusion section of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Most references cited in pharmaceutical promotional brochures referenced controlled studies that are retrievable. However, incorporation of more adequately controlled studies, more references from peer review journals, and careful evaluation of referenced statements by the pharmaceutical company, journals' editorial board. Food and Drug Administration, and healthcare professionals may be beneficial.

Bibliographies as Topic↗
PubMed1993

CD-ROM software.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

CD-ROM↗
PubMed1992

Current status of drug information centers.

The current status of drug information centers in the United States and trends that have developed over the past two decades were studied. In February 1990, questionnaires were sent to 218 pharmacist-operated drug information centers nationwide. The centers were identified through previously published directories and the ASHP electronic bulletin board PharmNet. The survey consisted of 182 questions designed to gather updated data on each drug information center. Responses to each question were coded individually, and data were analyzed by using a statistical analysis program. One hundred fifty-four drug information centers responded; of these, 130 provided usable responses. The results showed that the number of drug information centers has increased compared with earlier surveys. Also, the centers handle substantially larger workloads. Few drug information centers indicate a fee-for-service system. Computer use and online searching by drug information centers have increased. Most of the centers participate in the formal education of pharmacy students. Increases in the number of drug information centers and in their workload substantiate the growing importance of these centers to the health-care professions.

Computers↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Potential for microbial contamination of ADD-Vantage admixtures.

OBJECTIVE: To test for potential bacterial contamination of the ADD-Vantage system when the components are assembled in various hospital environments. STUDY DESIGN: One hundred fifty ADD-Vantage units were assembled by three different people in three separate locations within a hospital. Each person assembled ten units per day; the study spanned five days. After 72 hours of incubation, units were inspected for evidence of contamination. SETTING: ADD-Vantage units were assembled by a pharmacist in a laminar-flow hood, a pharmacy student using the pharmacy counter, and a nurse at a patient's bedside table. Personnel at each site wore their regular work attire. Each person observed handwashing techniques normally used during routine working hours. DATA EXTRACTION: Positive results were sent to the hospital microbiology laboratory for determination of growth type. RESULTS: After 72 hours, none of the systems exhibited microbial growth on visual inspection. No differences in microbial contamination of the ADD-Vantage systems relative to assembly site, day of assembly, or person performing the assembly were observed. The incidence of contamination was calculated at less than seven percent. CONCLUSIONS: There is minimal risk of bacterial contamination when ADD-Vantage systems are compounded either on a pharmacy counter or at a patient's bedside. Larger samples must be studied in order to detect differences in the incidence of contamination among assembly sites.

Cimetidine↗