CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 134Patient Safety and Medication ErrorsPharmacy and Medical PracticesSafe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs

Tablet-splitting: a common yet not so innocent practice

Verrue, Charlotte, Mehuys, Els, Boussery, Koen, Remon, Jean-Paul, Petrovic, Mirko·2011·Journal of Advanced Nursing
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05477.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

AIM: This paper is a report of a study conducted to quantify (i) the mean deviation from theoretical weight and (ii) the mean weight loss, after tablet-splitting with three different, commonly used splitting methods. BACKGROUND: Tablet-splitting is a widespread practice among all sectors of health care for different reasons: it increases dose flexibility, makes tablet parts easier to swallow and allows cost savings for both patients and healthcare providers. However, the tablet parts obtained are often not equal in size, and a substantial amount of tablet can be lost during splitting. METHOD: Five volunteers were asked to mimic the situation in nursing homes and to split eight tablets of different sizes and shapes using three different routine methods: (i) with a splitting device (Pilomat® ), (ii) with scissors for unscored tablets or manual splitting for scored tablets and (iii) with a kitchen knife. Before and after splitting, tablets and tablet parts were weighed using an analytical balance. The data were collected in 2007. RESULTS: For all tablets, method 1 gave a statistically significantly lower mean deviation from theoretical weight. The difference between method 2 and method 3 was not statistically significant. When pooling the different products, method 1 also induced significantly less weight loss than the two other methods. CONCLUSION: Large dose deviations or weight losses can occur while splitting tablets. This could have serious clinical consequences for medications with a narrow therapeutic-toxic range. On the basis of the results in this report, we recommend use of a splitting device when splitting cannot be avoided.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05477.x

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kayumba, 2006, Impact du cassage de comprimés de sulfate de quinine sur l’exactitude de la dose administrée aux enfants, Le pharmacien d’Afrique, 193, 11

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Verrue, C., Mehuys, E., Boussery, K., Remon, J.-P., & Petrovic, M.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
  • Ghent University (BE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-12-12
Volume
67
Issue
1
Pages
26-32
ISSN
0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05477.x
OpenAlex
W1536272772
Semantic Scholar
cdd945aa34d987f305ffbba0ed13f56c6a63f836
Cited by
134
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
9.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 1724 d)
Locations
  • Journal of Advanced Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Safe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
Keywords
tablet splitting, dose splitting, weight variation, tablet weight loss, scored tablets, dose accuracy, nursing homes, medication administration, narrow therapeutic index drugs
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Compounding, Female, Humans, Male, Medication Errors, Middle Aged, Nursing Homes, Tablets, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review