A Case Study of Implementation of Concurrent Drug Utilization Review System at a General Hospital

Choi, Jong Soo; Kim, Dong-Soo

doi:10.7232/jkiie.2013.39.1.020

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Through gathering opinions from several TF meetings, the cDUR system was developed in December 2011 and adopted for outpatients since January 1, 2012 without any trouble. According to the government guidelines, the checking of DUR conflict events is mandatory in hospitals in order for its benefits to be realized [ 12 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Doctors' Resistance on Success of Drug Utilization Review System

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe drug utilization review (DUR) system, which checks any conflict event of medications, contributes to improve patient safety. One of the important barriers in its adoption is doctors' resistance. This study aimed to analyze the impacts of doctors' resistance on the success of the DUR system.MethodsThis study adopted an augmented the DeLone and McLean Information System (D&M IS) Success Model (2003), which used doctors' resistance as a socio-technological measure. This study framework is the same as that of the D&M IS Success Model in that it is based on qualities, such as system, information, and services. The major difference is that this study excluded the variable 'use' because it was not statistically significant for mandatory systems. A survey of doctors who used computers to enter prescriptions was conducted at a Korean tertiary hospital in February 2012.ResultsThis study is very meaningful in that it is the first study to explore the success factors of the DUR system associated with doctors' resistance. Doctors' resistance to the DUR system was not statistically associated with user usefulness, whereas it affected user satisfaction.ConclusionsThe results indicate that doctors still complain of discomfort in using the DUR system in the outpatient clinical setting, even though they admit that it contributes to patient safety. To mitigate doctors' resistance and raise user satisfaction, more opinions from doctors regarding the DUR system have to be considered and have to be reflected in the system.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Doctors' Resistance on Success of Drug Utilization Review System

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A Drug Utilization Review (DUR) system prevents drug side effects and helps reduce the use of problematic medicine and medical supplies by preventing the prescription and preparation of inappropriate drugs [ 1 ]. Although the United States implemented such a system in 1990, South Korea developed the DUR, and it was subsequently implemented in all recuperation centers in the country [ 2 ]. Korea's DUR system can be largely divided into inspection "within and between prescriptions."…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Alert Override Codes for the Drug Utilization Review System Derived from Outpatient Prescription Data from a Tertiary Teaching Hospital in Korea

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThis paper proposes new alert override reason codes that are improvements on existing Drug Utilization Review (DUR) codes based on an analysis of DUR alert override cases in a tertiary medical institution.MethodsData were obtained from a tertiary teaching hospital covering the period from April 1, 2012 to January 15, 2013. We analyzed cases in which doctors had used the 11 overlapping prescription codes provided by the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) or had provided free-text reasons.ResultsWe identified 27,955 alert override cases. Among these, 7,772 (27.8%) utilized the HIRA codes, and 20,183 (72.2%) utilized free-text reasons. According to the free-text content analysis, 8,646 cases (42.8%) could be classified using the 11 HIRA codes, and 11,537 (57.2%) could not. In the unclassifiable cases, we identified the need for codes for "prescription relating to operation" and "emergency situations." Two overlapping prescription codes required removal because they were not used. Codes A, C, F, H, I, and J (for drug non-administration cases) explained surrounding situations in too much detail, making differentiation between them difficult. These 6 codes were merged into code J4: "patient was not taking/will not take the medications involved in the DDI." Of the 11 HIRA codes, 6 were merged into a single code, 2 were removed, and 2 were added, yielding 6 alert override codes. We could codify 23,550 (84.2%) alert override cases using these codes.ConclusionsThese new codes will facilitate the use of the drug–drug interactions alert override in the current DUR system. For further study, an appropriate evaluation should be conducted with prescribing clinicians.

show abstract