37 research outputs found

    Trends in computerized provider order entry: 20-year bibliometric overview

    Get PDF
    BackgroundDrug-related problems (DRPs) can lead to serious health issues and have significant economic impacts on healthcare systems. One solution to address this issue is the use of computerized physician order entry systems (CPOE), which can help prevent DRPs by reducing the risk of medication errors.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to provide an analysis on scientific production of the past 20 years in order to describe trends in academic publishing on CPOE and to identify the major topics as well as the predominant actors (journals, countries) involved in this field.MethodsA PubMed search was carried out to extract articles related to computerized provider order entry during the period January 1st 2003– December 31st 2022 using a specific query. Data were downloaded from PubMed in Extensible Markup Language (XML) and were processed through a dedicated parser.ResultsA total of 2,946 articles were retrieved among 623 journals. One third of these articles were published in eight journals. Publications grew strongly from 2002 to 2006, with a dip in 2008 followed by an increase again in 2009. After 2009, there follows a decreasing until 2022.The most producing countries are the USA with 51.39% of the publication over the period by France (3.80%), and Canada (3.77%). About disciplines, the top 3 is: “medical informatics” (21.62% of articles), “pharmacy” (19.04%), and “pediatrics” (6.56%).DiscussionThis study provides an overview of publication trends related to CPOE, which exhibited a significant increase in the first decade of the 21st century followed by a decline after 2009. Possible reasons for this decline include the emergence of digital health tools beyond CPOE, as well as healthcare professionals experiencing alert fatigue of the current system.ConclusionFuture research should focus on analyzing publication trends in the field of medical informatics and decision-making tools to identify other areas of interest that may have surpassed the development of CPOE

    Performance evaluation of unified medical language systemÂź's synonyms expansion to query PubMed

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>PubMed is the main access to medical literature on the Internet. In order to enhance the performance of its information retrieval tools, primarily non-indexed citations, the authors propose a method: expanding users' queries using Unified Medical Language System' (UMLS) synonyms i.e. all the terms gathered under one unique Concept Unique Identifier.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This method was evaluated using queries constructed to emphasize the differences between this new method and the current PubMed automatic term mapping. Four experts assessed citation relevance.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Using UMLS, we were able to retrieve new citations in 45.5% of queries, which implies a small increase in recall. The new strategy led to a heterogeneous 23.7% mean increase in non-indexed citation retrieved. Of these, 82% have been published less than 4 months earlier. The overall mean precision was 48.4% but differed according to the evaluators, ranging from 36.7% to 88.1% (Inter rater agreement was poor: kappa = 0.34).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study highlights the need for specific search tools for each type of user and use-cases. The proposed strategy may be useful to retrieve recent scientific advancement.</p

    Analyse de la consultation de reprise du travail aprĂšs cancer

    No full text
    Plusieurs travaux ont montrĂ© les difficultĂ©s de maintien dans l'emploi des personnes atteintes de pathologies cancĂ©reuses. pourtant, la reprise du travail est un Ă©lĂ©ment important dans la qualitĂ© de vie des patients. En effet, elle ne reprĂ©sente pas seulement une source de revenus, elle signifie Ă©galement une rĂ©integration sociale, un retour a une vie "normale" et une "victoire sur la maladie". Afin d'accompagner les patients dans leur retour a l'emploi, une consultation pilote d'aide Ă  la reprise du travail aprĂšs cancer a Ă©tĂ© mise en place dans le centre de consultations de pathologies professionnelles du CHU de Rouen debut 2006. La prise en charge est multidisciplinaire associant un mĂ©decin du travail, un psychologue et une assistante sociale. L'objectif de ce travail Ă©tait de faire un bilan de cette consultation. L'ensemble des dossiers mĂ©dicaux a donc Ă©tĂ© analysĂ© et les patients ont Ă©tĂ© recontactĂ©s afin d'Ă©valuer leur devenir. Au total, 70 patients ont Ă©tĂ© pris en charge. Il s'agissait principalement de femmes ayant prĂ©sentĂ© un cancer du sein (63%). Lors de la 1Ăšre consultation, les patients etaient dans 3 types de situation : ils travaillaient mais avec difficultes (14%), ils Ă©taient en arrĂȘt de travail et s'interrogeaient sur les modalitĂ©s de la reprise (49%), ou ils n'avaient pas d'activitĂ© et souhaitaient de l'aide pour trouver un poste de travail adaptĂ© Ă  leur situation (37%). le taux de reprise observĂ© a Ă©tĂ© de 57 %. les facteurs associĂ©s Ă  une reprise du travail ont Ă©tĂ© Ă©tudies. Plusieurs tendances ont Ă©tĂ© montrĂ©es, mais la significativite est rarement atteinte du fait de l'effectif faible. Les rĂ©sultats mettent en evidence l'intĂ©rĂȘt d'une aide Ă  la reprise du travail et soulignent quelques Ă©lĂ©ments qui nĂ©cessitent d'ĂȘtre ameliorĂ©s, par exemple, le travail en rĂ©seau doit ĂȘre encore intensifiĂ©ROUEN-BU MĂ©decine-Pharmacie (765402102) / SudocSudocFranceF

    Le suivi des salariĂ©s par les SST avant et pendant la crise sanitaire : qu’en disent les donnĂ©es de l’observatoire Evrest ?

    No full text
    International audienceObjectifsLa crise sanitaire liĂ©e Ă  la pandĂ©mie de COVID-19 a impactĂ© l’activitĂ© des services de santĂ© au travail (SST) et le suivi des salariĂ©s, dont le suivi via l’observatoire Evrest. Les objectifs de cette Ă©tude Ă©taient de : (1) s’assurer de la continuitĂ© de la qualitĂ© des donnĂ©es issues d’Evrest : (2) Ă©tudier les variations potentielles du travail et de la santĂ© des salariĂ©s suivis avant ou pendant la crise.MĂ©thodesLes analyses ont portĂ© sur 15 543 salariĂ©s suivis entre le 1/01/2019 et le 16/03/2020, et sur les 6856 suivis entre le 17/03/2020 – premier jour du confinement initial, considĂ©rĂ© comme marquant le dĂ©but de la crise – et le 31/08/2021. La pĂ©riode « avant la crise » (AC) a Ă©tĂ© dĂ©coupĂ©e en sous-pĂ©riodes d’environ 5 mois : la pĂ©riode « pendant la crise » (PC) a Ă©tĂ© dĂ©coupĂ©e en six sous-pĂ©riodes de durĂ©es inĂ©gales basĂ©es sur le calendrier des principales mesures sanitaires gouvernementales (confinements et couvre-feux). Une comparaison des variables de pondĂ©ration des Ă©chantillons nationaux (tests du Chi2) et des plaintes de santĂ© (tests du Chi2 puis rĂ©gressions logistiques ajustĂ©es sur les variables de pondĂ©ration pour la santĂ©) ont Ă©tĂ© rĂ©alisĂ©es selon les 9 sous-pĂ©riodes, sur Ă©chantillon brut. Puis des variations de la frĂ©quence des contraintes de travail et des plaintes de santĂ© ont Ă©tĂ© recherchĂ©es entre AC et PC sur Ă©chantillons redressĂ©s, globalement puis selon les catĂ©gories socioprofessionnelles (CSP) (tests du Chi2 et rĂ©gressions logistiques).RĂ©sultatsLes variables servant Ă  la pondĂ©ration des Ă©chantillons Evrest nationaux sont globalement homogĂšnes au fil des sous-pĂ©riodes. La santĂ© des salariĂ©s semble varier selon qu’ils ont Ă©tĂ© interrogĂ©s pendant ou en dehors d’une pĂ©riode incluant un confinement, bien que les rĂ©sultats soient peu significatifs. Entre AC et PC, intra-CSP, seuls de faibles Ă©carts de contraintes de travail sont observĂ©s, et aucune diffĂ©rence de santĂ© n’apparaĂźt.ConclusionsLes donnĂ©es d’Evrest ont conservĂ© leur qualitĂ© au cours de la pĂ©riode de crise sanitaire. La comparaison AC versus PC ne laisse pas apparaĂźtre de diffĂ©rence majeure sur le travail et la santĂ© des salariĂ©s en emploi aux deux pĂ©riodes. Toutefois, la comparaison porte sur des salariĂ©s suivis par les SST, donc en emploi, et ne dit rien de ce que serait l’évolution du travail et de la santĂ© de mĂȘmes salariĂ©s interrogĂ©s aux deux pĂ©riodes, ou de salariĂ©s sortis de leur emploi depuis le dĂ©but de la crise sanitaire

    Occupational stressors in healthcare workers in France

    No full text
    International audienceObjectivesTo describe psychosocial constraints and mental health of hospital workers, and to identify the psychosocial constraints significantly associated with mental health difficulties, especially in two groups: caregivers and other hospital workers.MethodData about working conditions and health status collected by the Evrest National observatory in 2018–2019 during occupational health consultation were used. Psychosocial constraints and mental health among caregivers, other hospital workers and non-hospital workers were described.ResultsThere were 1251 hospital workers (843 caregivers, 408 other hospital workers) and 25 129 other workers. Intensity and working time (time pressure, extra working time, missing or shortening a meal), and ethical dilemmas (not having the means to ensure high-quality work, too rapidly handling a procedure that would require more painstaking care) were significantly more reported by the caregivers than by the other hospital workers (50.8% vs 44.2%, 43.4% vs 32.5%, 47.2% vs 17.2%, 21.4% vs 16.4% and 41.5% vs 29.0% respectively). Prevalence of psychological distress was not significantly higher for caregivers (12.3%) than for other hospital workers (12.4%) but was significantly higher than for other workers (7.3%). For caregivers, factors significantly associated with psychological distress were time pressure (Odds Ratio adjusted on sociodemographic factors (OR) = 2.33 CI95% [1.35–4.04]), “difficulties to reconcile private life and work life” (OR = 2.95 [1.54–5.69]), “work not recognized in the professional setting” (OR = 1.89 [1.08–3.31]) and “fear of losing one's job” (OR = 2.98 [1.53–5.8]). For other hospital workers, they were “difficulties to reconcile private life and work life (OR = 2.76 [1.04–7.30]), “insufficient possibilities of mutual aid” (OR = 2.85 [1.24–6.53] and “not having the means to ensure high-quality work” (OR = 3.42 [1.62–7.21]).ConclusionFactors significantly associated with psychological distress were not the same for caregivers and other hospital workers, nor were they the most frequently reported. Detailed description of the constraints according to group of workers could help to develop a high-priority preventive program regarding psychosocial risk factors.ObjectifsDĂ©crire les contraintes psychosociales et la santĂ© mentale des travailleurs hospitaliers et identifier les contraintes significativement associĂ©es Ă  des troubles neuropsychiques, en particulier chez les soignants et les autres salariĂ©s hospitaliers.MĂ©thodeLes donnĂ©es collectĂ©es par l'observatoire national Evrest durant les consultations de santĂ© au travail en 2018-2019 ont Ă©tĂ© utilisĂ©es. Les contraintes psychosociales et la santĂ© mentale ont Ă©tĂ© dĂ©crites parmi les personnels hospitaliers soignants, les autres salariĂ©s hospitaliers et les travailleurs non hospitaliers.RĂ©sultatsLa population d'Ă©tude comprenait 1 251 travailleurs hospitaliers (843 soignants, 408 non soignants) et 25 129 autres travailleurs. L'intensitĂ© et le temps de travail (forte pression temporelle, dĂ©passer les horaires normaux, sauter ou Ă©courter un repas), les conflits de valeur (ne pas avoir les moyens de faire un travail de qualitĂ©, traiter trop vite une opĂ©ration qui demanderait davantage de soin) Ă©taient significativement plus rapportĂ©s par les soignants que par les non soignants (respectivement 50,8% vs 44,2%, 43,4% vs 32,5%, 47,2% vs 17,2%, 21,4% vs 16,4% and 41,5% vs 29,0%). La prĂ©valence des troubles neuropsychiques n'Ă©tait pas significativement diffĂ©rente entre les soignants (12,3%) et les non soignants (12,4%), mais Ă©tait significativement plus importante que chez les autres travailleurs (7,3%). Chez les soignants, les facteurs significativement associĂ©s Ă  la prĂ©sence de troubles neuropsychiques Ă©taient la forte pression temporelle (OR = 2,33 IC95% [1,35–4,04]), les difficultĂ©s pour concilier vie privĂ©e et vie professionnelle (OR = 2,95 [1,54–5,69]), l'absence de reconnaissance par l'entourage professionnel (OR = 1.89 [1.08–3.31]) et la peur de perdre son travail (OR = 2,98 [1,53–5,8]). Pour les autres travailleurs hospitaliers, il s'agissait des difficultĂ©s pour concilier vies privĂ©e et professionnelle (OR = 2,76 [1,04–7,30]), de manquer d'entraide (OR = 2,85 [1,24–6,53] et manquer de moyens pour faire un travail de qualitĂ© (OR = 3,42 [1,62–7,21]).ConclusionsLes facteurs associĂ©s aux troubles neuropsychiques ne sont pas les mĂȘmes chez les soignants et les autres travailleurs hospitaliers. Il ne s'agit pas non plus des facteurs les plus frĂ©quemment rapportĂ©s. La description dĂ©taillĂ©e des facteurs selon le groupe de travailleurs peut ĂȘtre utilisĂ©e pour cibler les actions de prĂ©vention prioritaires en termes de risque psychosociaux

    Work xx (20xx) x-xx Giving up work after cancer: An exploratory qualitative study of three clinical cases Sortie de l'emploi aprĂšs un cancer : Une Ă©tude exploratoire qualitative Ă  partir de trois cas cliniques Sortie de l'emploi aprĂšs un cancer

    Get PDF
    International audienceBACKGROUND:Enabling cancer survivors to resume employment has become a public health issue in France, but not all survivors wish to or would benefit from doing so. OBJECTIVE:This French exploratory qualitative study was designed to identify the psychological factors that influence the decision of some cancer survivors not to return to work, despite their doctor’s permission. METHODS:We conducted semi structured interviews with two women and one man. Each interview lasted around 90 minutes. Qualitative analysis of the interviews (clinical case studies) highlighted a number of similarities and differences among these three patients. RESULTS:Comparisons revealed six similarities: 1. the issue of income and its importance had no part in the decision-making process; 2. patients anticipated work return problems; 3. they therefore abandoned their plans to go back; 4. work lost its meaning for them; 5. repressed affects surfaced or they reassessed their career plans; and 6. their life trajectories were disrupted, with the stages being telescoped together. There were also two differences: 1. feelings of social exclusion for two participants, and 2. gendered experiences of quitting employment. CONCLUSIONS:Health professionals and job retention support services need to take this clinical reality into account and acknowledge that not all patients wish to resume work or would benefit from doing so

    Reliability of citations of medRxiv preprints in articles published on COVID-19 in the world leading medical journals

    No full text
    International audienceIntroduction Preprints have been widely cited during the COVID-19 pandemics, even in the major medical journals. However, since subsequent publication of preprint is not always mentioned in preprint repositories, some may be inappropriately cited or quoted. Our objectives were to assess the reliability of preprint citations in articles on COVID-19, to the rate of publication of preprints cited in these articles and to compare, if relevant, the content of the preprints to their published version. Methods Articles published on COVID in 2020 in the BMJ, The Lancet, the JAMA and the NEJM were manually screened to identify all articles citing at least one preprint from medRxiv. We searched PubMed, Google and Google Scholar to assess if the preprint had been published in a peer-reviewed journal, and when. Published articles were screened to assess if the title, data or conclusions were identical to the preprint version. Results Among the 205 research articles on COVID published by the four major medical journals in 2020, 60 (29.3%) cited at least one medRxiv preprint. Among the 182 preprints cited, 124 were published in a peer-reviewed journal, with 51 (41.1%) before the citing article was published online and 73 (58.9%) later. There were differences in the title, the data or the conclusion between the preprint cited and the published version for nearly half of them. MedRxiv did not mentioned the publication for 53 (42.7%) of preprints. Conclusions More than a quarter of preprints citations were inappropriate since preprints were in fact already published at the time of publication of the citing article, often with a different content. Authors and editors should check the accuracy of the citations and of the quotations of preprints before publishing manuscripts that cite them
    corecore