Themes for our journal: 2014-2016 : Editorial

The objective of this systematic review is to analyse the relative risk reduction on medication error and adverse drug events (ADE) by computerized physician order entry systems (CPOE). We included controlled field studies and pretest-posttest studies, evaluating all types of CPOE systems, drugs and clinical settings. We present the results in evidence tables, calculate the risk ratio with 95% confidence interval and perform subgroup analyses for categorical factors, such as the level of care, patient group, type of drug, type of system, functionality of the system, comparison group type, study design, and the method for detecting errors. Of the 25 studies that analysed the effects on the medication error rate, 23 showed a significant relative risk reduction of 13% to 99%. Six of the nine studies that analysed the effects on potential ADEs showed a significant relative risk reduction of 35% to 98%. Four of the seven studies that analysed the effect on ADEs showed a significant relative risk reduction of 30% to 84%. Reporting quality and study quality was often insufficient to exclude major sources of bias. Studies on home-grown systems, studies comparing electronic prescribing to handwriting prescribing, and studies using manual chart review to detect errors seem to show a higher relative risk reduction than other studies. Concluding, it seems that electronic prescribing can reduce the risk for medication errors and ADE. However, studies differ substantially in their setting, design, quality, and results. To further improve the evidence-base of health informatics, more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed, especially to cover a wider range of clinical and geographic settings. In addition, reporting quality of health informatics evaluation studies has to be substantially improved. Show more

Around a quarter of those in the developed world die of cancer. Most cancers present to primary care with symptoms, even when there is a screening test for the particular cancer. However, the symptoms of cancer are also symptoms of benign disease, and the GP has to judge whether cancer is a possible explanation. Very little research examined this process until relatively recently. This review paper examines the process of primary care diagnosis, especially the selection of patients for rapid investigation. It concentrates on the four commonest UK cancers: breast, lung, colon, and prostate as these have been the subject of most recent studies. Show more

Head and neck (H&N) cancer is mainly a cancer of the elderly; however, the implementation of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) to quantify functional age in these patients has not yet been studied. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of screening tools [Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13), G8 and the Combined Screening Tool 'VES-13 + (17-G8)' or CST], the feasibility of serial CGA, and correlations with health-related quality of life evolution [HRQOL; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires (EORTC QLQ)-C30 and -HN35] during therapy in hundred patients, aged ≥65 years, with primary H&N cancer undergoing curative radio(chemo)therapy. Respectively 36.8%, 69.0%, 62.1% and 71.3% were defined vulnerable according to VES-13, G8, CST and CGA at week 0, mostly due to presence of severe grade co-morbidities, difficulties in community functioning and nutritional problems. At week 4, significantly more patients were identified vulnerable due to nutritional, functional and emotional deterioration. The CST did not achieve the predefined proportion necessary for validation. Vulnerable patients reported lower function and higher symptom HRQOL scores as compared with fit patients. A comparable deterioration in HRQOL was observed in both groups through therapy. In conclusion, G8 remains the screening tool of choice. Serial CGA identifies the evolution of multidimensional health problems and HRQOL conditions during therapy with potential to guide individualised supportive care. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Show more