Why the study?
Does indirect adverse-drug-reaction surveillance by staff pharmacists effectively detect adverse reactions to anticoagulants compared to direct surveillance by an on-floor pharmacist observer?
Does indirect adverse-drug-reaction surveillance by staff pharmacists effectively detect adverse reactions to anticoagulants compared to direct surveillance by an on-floor pharmacist observer?
Relying on staff pharmacists to detect 'alerting orders' is less effective than concurrent on-floor monitoring for identifying adverse reactions to anticoagulants.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Staff pharmacists detect fewer alerting orders than direct observation; leaves open whether on-floor monitoring improves anticoagulant safety surveillance.
Swanson et al. (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: