Accuracy and usability of medication identifiers for solid oral medications

Background A comprehensive, contemporary evaluation of medication identifiers is necessary to keep up with the fast‐paced mobile and web‐based technology used by health care professionals and patients in order to safely identify and use oral medications. Prior studies evaluating the accuracy of medi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:JAACP : Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy 2019-04, Vol.2 (2), p.98-107
Hauptverfasser: Jackevicius, Cynthia A., Lash, David, Singh, Divvjyot, Hines, Kelli, Hata, Micah
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background A comprehensive, contemporary evaluation of medication identifiers is necessary to keep up with the fast‐paced mobile and web‐based technology used by health care professionals and patients in order to safely identify and use oral medications. Prior studies evaluating the accuracy of medication identifiers are dated, with the most recent solely examining imprints of oral medications. Objective To compare the accuracy of different medication identifiers, and to identify and quantify ease of use between lay and professional medication identifiers. Methods We conducted a cross‐sectional study of 202 randomly selected oral medications, comparing the results of 14 lay and professional medication identifiers with reference standard‐identified medications. Investigators conducted three different searches for each medication using a standardized search methodology, including each medication's imprint, shape, color, scoring, and dosage form. Results Ident‐A‐Drug, Drugs.com, Facts & Comparisons, and web‐based Lexicomp were the four most accurate identifiers at 98%, 97.5%, 96.5%, and 96.5%, respectively. Web‐based identifiers correctly identified more medications compared with mobile‐based identifiers (93.2% vs 80.6%, P 
ISSN:2574-9870
2574-9870
DOI:10.1002/jac5.1033