In-hospital medication reviews reduce unidentified drug-related problems

Assessment of a Geriatric Evaluation and Management in the Home (GEMITH) Service at a Quaternary Hospital: A Retrospective Observational Study

Background: The increasing aging population in Australia has created a higher demand for specialist geriatric services within hospitals. A Geriatric Evaluation and Management in the Home (GEMITH) service was implemented at a quaternary Queensland hospital. The GEMITH service was unique as it incorporated a specialist pharmacist into the multidisciplinary team. Objective: To determine the medication safety and quality impact of the GEMITH service by evaluating the type and clinical significance of specialist pharmacist interventions. Methods: This was retrospective observational study of clinical interventions made by the GEMITH pharmacist for patients admitted to the service between October 2020 to April 2021. All pharmacist interventions were rated for their clinical significance using the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia (SHPA) risk classification system. The ratings were undertaken by a panel of three pharmacists that independently assessed the interventions, coming together for final discussion. A narrative analysis of the interventions were derived through group consensus. Results: There was a total of 119 admissions to the GEMITH service, with 132 clinical interventions made by the specialist geriatric pharmacist. The majority (47%) of interventions were considered as low risk interventions, although high- (21%) and extreme-risk (2%) interventions still occurred. The most common type of intervention (32%) involved medication reconciliation. Other intervention types included monitoring recommendations, dosing interventions, and deprescribing suggestions. Conclusion: Multiple clinical interventions were made by the GEMITH pharmacist, which prevented possible and significant medication-related harm. This demonstrated the quality impact of the specialist pharmacist in improving medication safety for geriatric patients.

Strategies to Improve Therapeutic Adherence in Polymedicated Patients over 65 Years: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Part of the population over 65 years of age suffer from several pathologies and are therefore polymedicated. In this systematic review and metanalysis, we aimed to determine the efficacy of several strategies developed to improve adherence to pharmacological treatment in polymedicated elderly people.

DESIGN

Web Of Science, PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched until 2 January 2024. In total, 17 of the 1508 articles found evaluated the efficacy of interventions to improve adherence to medication in polymedicated elderly patients. Methodological quality and the risk of bias were rated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Open Meta Analyst® software was used to create forest plots of the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In 11 of the 17 studies, an improvement in adherence was observed through the use of different measurement tools and sometimes in combination. The most frequently used strategy was using instructions and counselling, always in combination, in a single strategy used to improve adherence; one involved the use of medication packs and the other patient follow-up. In both cases, the results in improving adherence were positive. Five studies using follow-up interventions via visits and phone calls showed improved adherence on the Morisky Green scale compared to those where usual care was received [OR = 1.900; 95% CI = 1.104-3.270] (p = 0.021).

DISCUSSION

There is a high degree of heterogeneity in the studies analyzed, both in the interventions used and in the measurement tools for improving adherence to treatment. Therefore, we cannot make conclusions about the most efficacious strategy to improve medication adherence in polymedicated elderly patients until more evidence of single-intervention strategies is available.

Clinical pharmacy interventions in an Austrian hospital: a report highlights the need for the implementation of clinical pharmacy services

BACKGROUND

Clinical pharmacy services face challenges in Austria due to limited implementation and acceptance, outdated legislation and a lack of guidelines and training, despite the evidence from global studies of the positive impact of clinical pharmacists on patient care.

OBJECTIVES

First, to identify the necessary types of clinical pharmacy interventions required at a 360-bed hospital located in Austria. Second, to evaluate the extent to which physicians accept the suggestions made by clinical pharmacists.

METHODS

Over a period of 27 months, a clinical pharmacist made a series of interventions, which were evaluated using a six-point clinical significance scale. To determine the inter-rater reliability, a subset of 25 interventions was assessed for their clinical significance by four independent internal medicine physicians.

RESULTS

A total of 1064 interventions were made by the pharmacist. Clinical pharmacy input was deemed necessary for 986 out of 1364 (72.3%) patients, with an average of 1.08 interventions per patient. The prompt acceptance rate of these interventions by physicians was 83.5% (888/1064), while 12.9% (137/1064) were considered by physicians but not immediately acted upon. The average clinical significance intervention rating was 2.15. The inter-rater reliability agreement between the four MDs and between the four MDs and the pharmacist was classified as 'good' to 'moderate'.

CONCLUSION

This study in a secondary care Austrian hospital demonstrates the requirement for clinical pharmacy services, which are highly valued by other healthcare professionals. The clinical pharmacist is a key member of the multidisciplinary ward team, playing a vital role in reducing drug-related problems and enhancing patient safety. This work should now be scaled and tested in other Austrian hospitals.

Understanding of healthcare professionals towards the roles and competencies of clinical pharmacists in South Africa

BACKGROUND

Incorporating clinical pharmacists in collaborative medical teams results in better patient treatment and health outcomes. In addition, the understanding of other healthcare professionals (HCPs) towards the role of clinical pharmacists can either facilitate or hinder the implementation and expansion of these services. The main distinction between pharmacists and clinical pharmacists lie in their different scope of duties. This study set out to explore other HCPs' understanding towards the role of the clinical pharmacists in South Africa, and to identify associated factors.

METHODS

An exploratory, survey-based, quantitative study was conducted. A survey assessing HCPs' understanding based on the competencies and role of a clinical pharmacist was distributed to 300 doctors, nurses, pharmacists and clinical pharmacists. An exploratory factor analysis was carried out to determine the construct validity of the measurement. Items were analysed for grouping into subscales through principal components analysis. Differences in the variable scores for gender, age, work experience and previous experience working with a clinical pharmacist were analyzed using independent t-tests. Analysis of variance was used to analyze differences in the variable scores for the different HCPs and the different departments of work in the hospital.

RESULTS

The factor analysis yielded two separate subscales, measuring HCPs' (n = 188) understanding towards the role of a clinical pharmacist, as well as the competencies of a clinical pharmacist. Doctors (85, n = 188) (p = 0.004) and nurses (76, n = 188) (p = 0.022), working in both surgical and non-surgical units, had significantly poorer understanding of the role of clinical pharmacists than clinical pharmacists (8, n = 188) and pharmacists (19, n = 188) (p = 0.028). Where specific clinical pharmacist activities were described, 5-16% of pharmacists were unsure whether an activity forms part of a clinical pharmacist's role. Over 50% of the clinical pharmacists disagreed that their role also includes pharmacist's activities, like stock procurement and control, pharmacy and administrative work, and hospital pharmacy-medication dispensing activities.

CONCLUSION

The findings highlighted the possible impact of role expectations and lack of understanding among HCPs. A standard job description with recognition from statutory bodies could promote other HCPs, as well as clinical pharmacists' understanding of their roles. Findings further suggested the need for interventions like interprofessional education opportunities, staff induction programmes and regular interprofessional meetings to foster acknowledgement of clinical pharmacy services, promoting the acceptance and growth of the profession.

Medication review in hospitalised patients to reduce morbidity and mortality

BACKGROUND

A medication review can be defined as a structured evaluation of a patient's medication conducted by healthcare professionals with the aim of optimising medication use and improving health outcomes. Optimising medication therapy though medication reviews may benefit hospitalised patients.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the effects of medication review interventions in hospitalised adult patients compared to standard care or to other types of medication reviews on all-cause mortality, hospital readmissions, emergency department contacts and health-related quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

In this Cochrane Review update, we searched for new published and unpublished trials using the following electronic databases from 1 January 2014 to 17 January 2022 without language restrictions: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). To identify additional trials, we searched the reference lists of included trials and other publications by lead trial authors, and contacted experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of medication reviews delivered by healthcare professionals for hospitalised adult patients. We excluded trials including outpatients and paediatric patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for data clarification and relevant unpublished data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous data (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the overall certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we included a total of 25 trials (15,076 participants), of which 15 were new trials (11,501 participants). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 20 months. We found that medication reviews in hospitalised adults may have little to no effect on mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05; 18 trials, 10,108 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce hospital readmissions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 17 trials, 9561 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce emergency department contacts (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.03; 8 trials, 3527 participants; low-certainty evidence) and have very uncertain effects on health-related quality of life (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.30; 4 trials, 392 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Medication reviews in hospitalised adult patients likely reduce hospital readmissions and may reduce emergency department contacts. The evidence suggests that mediation reviews may have little to no effect on mortality, while the effect on health-related quality of life is very uncertain. Almost all trials included elderly polypharmacy patients, which limits the generalisability of the results beyond this population.

The Pharmacist’s Role in the Implementation of FASTHUG-MAIDENS, a Mnemonic to Facilitate the Pharmacotherapy Assessment of Critically Ill Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

FASTHUG is a mnemonic used by intensive care physicians to ensure the proper management of patients admitted to an Intensive Care Unit (ICU). FASTHUG-MAIDENS is a modified version that incorporates key pharmacotherapeutic elements such as delirium management, drug dosing, and drug interactions for an appropriate medication assessment of critically ill patients. An analytical cross-sectional study of hospitalized patients was carried out to determine aspects related to the pharmacotherapeutic management of critically ill patients that required to be optimized, to design and implement a protocol based on the FASTHUG-MAIDENS mnemonic. A total of 435 evaluations were performed to assess the status of current critical patient management. The main parameters with opportunities to be improved were analgesia, feeding, and sedation. With the implementation of MAIDENS, the parameters of analgesia, sedation, and thromboprophylaxis showed an increase in the percentage of optimal management. Furthermore, 103 drug-related problems were detected, and most of them were associated with feeding (21.3%), glucose control (11.7%), and delirium (9.7%). The FASTHUG MAIDENS protocol implementation allows for the evaluation of more vital aspects in the management of critically ill patients. The daily review of patients admitted to the ICU by a clinical pharmacist (CP) using the FASTHUG-MAIDENS checklist instead of the FASTHUG mnemonic facilitates the identification of DRPs for the performance of possible interventions by the CP to improve the pharmacotherapeutic management.

Intervention fidelity and process outcomes of the IMMENSE study, a pharmacist-led interdisciplinary intervention to improve medication safety in older hospitalized patients

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The majority of hospitalized older patients experience medication-related problems (MRPs), and there is a call for interventions to solve MRPs and improve clinical outcomes like medical visits. The IMMENSE study is a randomized controlled trial investigating the impact of a pharmacist-led interdisciplinary intervention on emergency medical visits. Its multistep intervention is based on the integrated medicines management methodology and includes a follow-up step with primary care. This study aims to describe how the intervention in the IMMENSE study was delivered and its process outcomes.

METHODS

The study includes the 221 intervention patients in the per-protocol group of the IMMENSE study. Both intervention delivery, reasons for not performing interventions and process outcomes were registered daily by the study pharmacists in a Microsoft Access^® database. Process outcomes were medication discrepancies, MRPs and how the team solved these.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 121 (54.8%) patients received all intervention steps if appropriate. All patients received medication reconciliation (MedRec) and medication Review (MedRev) (step 1 and 2), while between 10% and 20% of patients were missed for medication list in discharge summary (step 3), patient counselling (step 4), or communication with general practitioner and nurse (step 5). A total of 437 discrepancies were identified in 159 (71.9%) patients during MedRec, and 1042 MRPs were identified in 209 (94.6%) patients during MedRev. Of these, 292 (66.8%) and 700 (67.2%), respectively, were communicated to and solved by the interdisciplinary team during the hospital stay.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The fidelity of the single steps of the intervention was high even though only about half of the patients received all intervention steps. The impact of the intervention may be influenced by not implementing all steps in all patients, but the many discrepancies and MRPs identified and solved for the patients could explain a potential effect of the IMMENSE study.

Allergic Reactions Captured by Voluntary Reporting

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology of hospital adverse reactions (ARs), particularly allergic reactions, or hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), is poorly defined. To determine priorities for allergy safety in healthcare, we identified and described safety reports of allergic reactions.

METHODS

We searched the safety report database of a large academic medical center from April 2006 to March 2016 using 101 complete, truncated, and/or misspelled key words related to allergic symptoms, treatments, and culprits (e.g., medications, foods). Patient and event data were summarized for ARs and two types of ARs, HSRs and side effects/toxicities.

RESULTS

Among 9111 key word search-identified events, 876 (10%) were ARs, of which 436 (5%) were HSRs and the remaining 440 (5%) were side effect reactions or toxicities. Whereas the most common HSRs were simple cutaneous reactions (83%), the following severe immediate HSRs were also identified: shortness of breath (16%), anaphylaxis (14%), and angioedema (12%). Most HSRs were caused by drugs (81%), with antibiotics (26%), particularly β-lactams (11%), and vancomycin (8%), commonly implicated. Other causes of drug HSRs included contrast agents (24%), chemotherapeutics (7%), and opioids (6%). Nondrug HSRs were from blood products (8%), latex (3%), and devices (3%). Food reactions were rarely identified (1%).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified ARs, HSRs, and side effects/toxicities, contained in a decade of safety reports at an academic medical center. Allergy safety in the healthcare setting should target approaches to common and severe reactions, with a focus on the safe administration of β-lactams, vancomycin, contrast agents, chemotherapeutics, and opioids. Priority nondrug HSR culprits include blood products, latex, and devices.

An Overview on Patient-Centered Clinical Services

Drug-related problems (DRPs) had often been a concern in the system that needed to be detected, avoided, and addressed as soon as possible. The need for a clinical pharmacist becomes even more important. He is the one who can not only share the load but also be an important part of the system by providing required advice. They fill out the patient's pharmacotherapy reporting form and notify the medical team's head off any drug-related issues. General practitioners register severe adverse drug reactions (ADRs) yearly. As a result of all of this, a clinical pharmacist working in and around the healthcare system is expected to advance the pharmacy industry. Its therapy and drugs can improve one's health quality of life by curing, preventing, or diagnosing a disease, sign, or symptom. The sideshows, on the other hand, do much harm. Because of the services they offer, clinical pharmacy has grown in popularity. To determine the overall effect and benefits of the emergency department (ED) clinical pharmacist, a systematic review of clinical practice and patient outcomes will be needed. A clinical pharmacist's anatomy, toxicology, pharmacology, and medicinal chemistry expertise significantly improves a patient's therapy enforcement. It is now important to examine the failure points of healthcare systems as well as the individuals involved.

A pharmacist's unique opportunity within a multidisciplinary team to reduce drug-related problems for older adults in an intermediate care setting

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of research describing the pharmacist's role in the multidisciplinary care of older adults in the intermediate care setting.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the types of drug-related problems (DRPs) in older patients in this setting, to evaluate the implementation rate of pharmacist recommendations and the factors affecting implementation, and to assess the clinical significance of these recommendations.

METHODS

Data were collected over a 12-week period on one pharmacist's recommendations to reduce clinically relevant DRPs identified during medication reconciliation and review for all patients ≥65 years admitted to an intermediate care unit. The clinical significance of the recommendations was judged by four independent assessors using a validated tool. Statistical significance was predetermined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Of 494 clinically relevant DRPs identified in 91 patients (mean age: 82 years), 406 recommendations were communicated to the medical team, and 89.2% were implemented. Overall, 48.5% were communicated verbally, but no difference was found between the implementation rates of verbal and written recommendations (87.8% versus 90.4%; p = 0.4). Medication reconciliation recommendations were implemented more commonly than those regarding medication review (96.5% versus 79.5%; p < 0.0001). Recommendations judged to be of 'moderate significance' (66.8% of total) were implemented more often than those of 'minor significance' (93.2% versus 81.6%; p < 0.001). The consultant was provided with a significantly higher proportion of recommendations of 'moderate significance' when compared to the junior doctor (79.6% versus 63.3%; p = 0.02), but implemented significantly fewer recommendations (69.4% versus 91.9%; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The high implementation rate in this study shows the importance of pharmacist involvement to reduce DRPs in the multidisciplinary care of older adults in an intermediate care unit. Future research should focus on investigating the impact of pharmacist interventions on older patient outcomes and the associated cost-effectiveness in this setting.

The Impact of an Established Pharmaceutical Care Pathway on Drug Related Problems in an Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

The incidence of drug related problems (DRPs) in intensive care units (ICU) is higher compared to any other wards in the hospital, requiring a structured pathway to ensure optimum detection of DRPs. The study aimed to evaluate the impact of implementing a pharmaceutical care pathway on the detection and management of DRPs in an ICU.

METHODS

The study was conducted in a general ICU and included three phases: tool preparation phase included the development of a core measures reference pathway and daily working scenario flow-charts, a control phase where the patient files and pharmacists' case assessment notes were retrospectively reviewed to detect the rate of DRPs before pathway implementation and a prospective phase similar to the control phase but with the implementation of the new pathway. The number and classification of DRPs and required core measures in the control and implementation phases were documented.

RESULTS

Using the new pathway, the detection of unmet core measures increased from 7.3% in the control phase to 99% in the implementation phase (p-value <0.001). The prevalence of unidentified DRPs/1000 patients' service days decreased from 98.1 in the control phase to 27.08 in the implementation phase (p-value <0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the phases regarding mortality rate and length of ICU stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a unified pharmaceutical care pathway improved the detection of DRPs in ICU patients.

Prospective observational study of medication reviews in internal medicine wards: evaluation of drug-related problems

BACKGROUND

The Lund Integrated Medicines Management model offers a systematic approach for individualising and optimising patient drug treatment. Clinical, economical and humanistic outcomes have been shown as well as results from the medication reconciliation process. There is a need also to describe the medication review process.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the frequency and types of drug-related problems (DRPs) identified during medication reviews and to evaluate the actions of the pharmacists and the physicians regarding the identified DRPs.

METHOD

Structured medication reviews were conducted by a multi-professional team on top of standard care for 719 patients in two internal medicine wards in a Swedish University Hospital. The medication reviews were studied retrospectively to classify DRPs and actions taken.

RESULTS

A total of 573 (80%) of patients had at least one actual DRP; an average of three DRPs per patient and in total 2164. Wrong drug and adverse drug reaction were the most common types of DRPs. The most frequent medication groups involved in DRPs were drugs for the cardiovascular system and the nervous system and the most frequent substances were warfarin, digoxin, furosemide and paracetamol. The 10 most common medications accounted for 27% of the actual DRPs. Of the identified DRPs, a total of 1740 (80%) were acted on. The three most common types of adjustments made were withdrawal of drug therapy, change of drug therapy and initiation of drug therapy. When the pharmacist suggested an adjustment, the physician implemented 88% (1037/1174) of the recommendations.

CONCLUSION

DRPs are common among elderly patients who are admitted to hospital. Systematic identification of high-risk medications and common DRP types enables targeting of prioritised patients for medication reviews.

Risk factors for hospital readmission in older adults within 30 days of discharge - a comparative retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The area of hospital readmission in older adults within 30 days of discharge is extensively researched but few studies look at the whole process. In this study we investigated risk factors related, not only to patient characteristics prior to and events during initial hospitalisation, but also to the processes of discharge, transition of care and follow-up. We aimed to identify patients at most risk of being readmitted as well as processes in greatest need of improvement, the goal being to find tools to help reduce early readmissions in this population.

METHODS

This comparative retrospective study included 720 patients in total. Medical records were reviewed and variables concerning patient characteristics prior to and events during initial hospital stay, as well as those related to the processes of discharge, transition of care and follow-up, were collected in a standardised manner. Either a Student's t-test, χ²-test or Fishers' exact test was used for comparisons between groups. A multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify variables associated with readmission.

RESULTS

The final model showed increased odds of readmission in patients with a higher Charlson Co-morbidity Index (OR 1.12, p-value 0.002), excessive polypharmacy (OR 1.66, p-value 0.007) and living in the community with home care (OR 1.61, p-value 0.025). The odds of being readmitted within 30 days increased if the length of stay was 5 days or longer (OR 1.72, p-value 0.005) as well as if being discharged on a Friday (OR 1.88, p-value 0.003) or from a surgical unit (OR 2.09, p-value 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients of poor health, using 10 medications or more regularly and living in the community with home care, are at greater risk of being readmitted to hospital within 30 days of discharge. Readmissions occur more often after being discharged on a Friday or from a surgical unit. Our findings indicate patients at most risk of being readmitted as well as discharging routines in most need of improvement thus laying the ground for further studies as well as targeted actions to take in order to reduce hospital readmissions within 30 days in this population.

Impact of pharmacists' interventions on the pharmacotherapy of patients with complex needs monitored in multidisciplinary primary care teams

OBJECTIVES

Recently, pharmacists have joined multidisciplinary healthcare teams within family medicine groups (FMG) in Quebec Province, Canada. This study assessed the impact of their interventions on the pharmacotherapy of patients with complex needs monitored in FMGs.

METHODS

We performed a pre/post real-life intervention study among patients with complex needs referred to the FMG pharmacist in four FMGs in Quebec City. Pharmacists collected data at baseline, during follow-up and up to 6 months after the first encounter. They recorded all drug-related problems (DRPs) identified, interventions made and recommendations that were accepted by physicians. The researchers used the data collected to compare the medication regimen complexity index (MRCI) and medication adherence (using the proportion of days covered (PDC)) before and after the pharmacist's interventions. Descriptive statistics and paired sample t-tests were computed.

KEY FINDINGS

Sixty-four patients (median age: 74.5 years) were included; four patients were lost to follow-up. Pharmacists detected 300 DRPs (mean: 7.2 per patient) during the study period for which they made an intervention. The most common DRP was 'drug use without indication' (27%). The physicians accepted 263 (87.7%) of those interventions. The mean number of prescribed drugs per patient decreased from 13.8 (95% confidence interval (CI): 12.24 to 15.29) to 12.4 (95% CI: 10.92 to 13.90). The mean MRCI decreased from 47.18 to 41.74 (-5.44; 95% CI: 1.71 to 9.17), while the mean PDC increased from 84.4% to 90.0% (+5.6%; 95% CI: 2.7% to 8.4%).

CONCLUSION

Family medicine groups pharmacists can detect and resolve DRPs and can reduce medication regimen complexity and non-adherence to treatment in patients with complex needs monitored in FMGs.

Prevention of potentially inappropriate medication in internal medicine patients: A prospective study using the electronic application PIM-Check

WHAT IS KNOWN

Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) is a risk factor for drug-related problems (DRPs) and an important inpatient safety issue. PIM-Check is a screening tool designed to detect PIM in internal medicine patients.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether PIM-Check could help to identify and reduce DRPs.

METHOD

Prospective interventional study conducted on patients admitted to internal medicine wards in a university hospital between 1 September 2015 and 30 October 2015. Adult patients were included if they were hospitalized for more than 48 hours. Patients received either usual care (period 1 = control) or usual care plus medication screening by the wards' chief residents using PIM-Check (period 2 = intervention). An expert panel, composed of a clinical pharmacist, a clinical pharmacologist and two attending physicians in internal medicine, blinded to patient groups, identified DRPs.

RESULTS

A total of 297 patients were included (intervention: 109). The groups' demographic parameters were similar. The expert panel identified 909 DRPs (598: control; 311: intervention). The mean number of DRPs per patient was similar in the control (3.2; 95% CI: 2.9-3.5) and intervention groups (2.9; 95% CI: 2.4-3.3) (P = .12). PIM-Check displayed 33.4% of the 311 DRPs identified in the intervention group.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

In this study, PIM-Check had limited value, as the average number of DRPs per person was similar in both groups. Although one-third of DRPs counted in intervention group had been identified by PIM-Check, this did not lead to a reduction in DRPs. This lack of impact of PIM-Check on drug prescription may be explained by the number of alerts displayed by the application and hospital physicians' reluctance to modify the treatments for chronic conditions previously prescribed by general practitioners.

Physicians' perspectives on clinical pharmacy services in Northern Sweden: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

In many countries, clinical pharmacists are part of health care teams that work to optimize drug therapy and ensure patient safety. However, in Sweden, clinical pharmacy services (CPSs) in hospital settings have not been widely implemented and regional differences exist in the uptake of these services. Physicians' attitudes toward CPSs and collaborating with clinical pharmacists may facilitate or hinder the implementation and expansion of the CPSs and the role of the clinical pharmacist in hospital wards. The aim of this study was to explore physicians' perceptions regarding CPSs performed at hospital wards in Northern Sweden.

METHODS

Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of nine physicians who had previously worked with clinical pharmacists between November 2014 and January 2015. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using a constant comparison method.

RESULTS

Different themes emerged regarding physicians' views of clinical pharmacy; two main interlinked themes were service factors and pharmacist factors. The service was valued and described in a positive way by all physicians. It was seen as an opportunity for them to learn more about pharmacological treatment and also an opportunity to discuss patient medication treatment in detail. Physicians considered that CPSs could improve patient outcomes and they valued continuity and the ability to build a trusting relationship with the pharmacists over time. However, there was a lack of awareness of the CPSs. All physicians knew that one of the pharmacist's roles is to conduct medication reviews, but most of them were only able to describe a few elements of what this service encompasses. Pharmacists were described as "drug experts" and their recommendations were perceived as clinically relevant. Physicians wanted CPSs to continue and to be implemented in other wards.

CONCLUSIONS

All physicians were positive regarding CPSs and were satisfied with the collaboration with the clinical pharmacists. These findings are important for further implementation and expansion of CPSs, particularly in Northern Sweden.

Hospital pharmacists working with geriatric patients in Europe: a systematic literature review

Objectives

Multimorbidity of geriatric patients often leads to polypharmacy that increases the risk for drug interactions. Geriatric patients are also more sensitive to adverse drug reactions due to physiological changes resulting from ageing. Hence, the use of medicines should be considered thoroughly. This systematic literature review aimed at identifying and presenting available evidence on the effect of pharmaceutical interventions on geriatric patients, their medications or healthcare costs in a clinical setting in Europe.

Methods

We included all studies on research of pharmaceutical interventions on geriatric inpatients (≥65 years) in Europe since 2001. Database searches were conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and AgeInfo. In addition, the following journals were searched manually: European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 'Krankenhauspharmazie', 'Medizinische Monatsschrift für Pharmazeuten' and 'Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie'.

Results

Database screening yielded 8058 hits. After deletion of duplicates, screening of title and abstract, 143 full-text articles were analysed and 17 papers were included. Manual searching added four more papers. Included studies were conducted in Belgium, Denmark, England, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden and Spain. They demonstrate that pharmaceutical care on wards leads to more appropriate medication use and might reduce outcomes like drug-related readmissions. Intensified pharmaceutical care showed additional effects, even in countries with established pharmaceutical care in hospitals.

Conclusions

This systematic literature review demonstrates that ward-based pharmacists may improve the appropriateness of medications, seamless care and drug safety for geriatric inpatients while being cost effective.

PIM-Check: development of an international prescription-screening checklist designed by a Delphi method for internal medicine patients

OBJECTIVES

Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) occurs frequently and is a well-known risk factor for adverse drug events, but its incidence is underestimated in internal medicine. The objective of this study was to develop an electronic prescription-screening checklist to assist residents and young healthcare professionals in PIM detection.

DESIGN

Five-step study involving selection of medical domains, literature review and 17 semistructured interviews, a two-round Delphi survey, a forward/back-translation process and an electronic tool development.

SETTING

22 University and general hospitals from Canada, Belgium, France and Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

40 physicians and 25 clinical pharmacists were involved in the study.Agreement with the checklist statements and their usefulness for healthcare professional training were evaluated using two 6-point Likert scales (ranging from 0 to 5).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Agreement and usefulness ratings were defined as: >65% of the experts giving the statement a rating of 4 or 5, during the first Delphi-round and >75% during the second.

RESULTS

166 statements were generated during the first two steps. Mean agreement and usefulness ratings were 4.32/5 (95% CI 4.28 to 4.36) and 4.11/5 (4.07 to 4.15), respectively, during the first Delphi-round and 4.53/5 (4.51 to 4.56) and 4.36/5 (4.33 to 4.39) during the second (p<0.001). The final checklist includes 160 statements in 17 medical domains and 56 pathologies. An algorithm of approximately 31 000 lines was developed including comorbidities and medications variables to create the electronic tool.

CONCLUSION

PIM-Check is the first electronic prescription-screening checklist designed to detect PIM in internal medicine. It is intended to help young healthcare professionals in their clinical practice to detect PIM, to reduce medication errors and to improve patient safety.

Investigating the Relative Significance of Drug-Related Problem Categories

The aim of the review was to investigate whether an assessment of clinical significance can be related to specific drug-related problems (DRPs) and hence may assist in prioritizing individual categories of DRP categorization systems. The literature search using Google Scholar was performed for the period 1990 to 2013 and comprised primary research studies of clinical pharmacy interventions including DRP and clinical significance assessments. Two reviewers assessed the titles, abstracts, and full-text papers individually, and inclusion was determined by consensus. A total of 27 unique publications were included in the review. They had been conducted in 14 different countries and reported a large range of DRPs (71-5948). Five existing DRP categorisation systems were frequently used, and two methods employed to assess clinical significance were frequently reported. The present review could not establish a consistent relation between the DRP categories and the level of clinical significance. However, the categories "ADR" and possibly "Drug interaction" were often associated with an assessed high clinical significance, albeit they were infrequently identified in the studies. Hence, clinical significance assessments do not seem to be useful in prioritizing individual DRPs in the DRP categorization systems. Consequently, it may be necessary to reconsider our current approach for evaluating DRPs.

Role of the pharmacist in reducing healthcare costs: current insights

Global healthcare expenditure is escalating at an unsustainable rate. Money spent on medicines and managing medication-related problems continues to grow. The high prevalence of medication errors and inappropriate prescribing is a major issue within healthcare systems, and can often contribute to adverse drug events, many of which are preventable. As a result, there is a huge opportunity for pharmacists to have a significant impact on reducing healthcare costs, as they have the expertise to detect, resolve, and prevent medication errors and medication-related problems. The development of clinical pharmacy practice in recent decades has resulted in an increased number of pharmacists working in clinically advanced roles worldwide. Pharmacist-provided services and clinical interventions have been shown to reduce the risk of potential adverse drug events and improve patient outcomes, and the majority of published studies show that these pharmacist activities are cost-effective or have a good cost:benefit ratio. This review demonstrates that pharmacists can contribute to substantial healthcare savings across a variety of settings. However, there is a paucity of evidence in the literature highlighting the specific aspects of pharmacists' work which are the most effective and cost-effective. Future high-quality economic evaluations with robust methodologies and study design are required to investigate what pharmacist services have significant clinical benefits to patients and substantiate the greatest cost savings for healthcare budgets.

Drug-drug interactions and adverse drug reactions in polypharmacy among older adults: an integrative review

OBJECTIVE

to identify and summarize studies examining both drug-drug interactions (DDI) and adverse drug reactions (ADR) in older adults polymedicated.

METHODS

an integrative review of studies published from January 2008 to December 2013, according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, in MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases were performed.

RESULTS

forty-seven full-text studies including 14,624,492 older adults (≥ 60 years) were analyzed: 24 (51.1%) concerning ADR, 14 (29.8%) DDI, and 9 studies (19.1%) investigating both DDI and ADR. We found a variety of methodological designs. The reviewed studies reinforced that polypharmacy is a multifactorial process, and predictors and inappropriate prescribing are associated with negative health outcomes, as increasing the frequency and types of ADRs and DDIs involving different drug classes, moreover, some studies show the most successful interventions to optimize prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

DDI and ADR among older adults continue to be a significant issue in the worldwide. The findings from the studies included in this integrative review, added to the previous reviews, can contribute to the improvement of advanced practices in geriatric nursing, to promote the safety of older patients in polypharmacy. However, more research is needed to elucidate gaps.

OBJETIVO

identificar e sintetizar estudos que examinam as interações medicamentosas (IM) e reações adversas a medicamentos (RAM) em idosos polimedicados.

MÉTODOS

revisão integrativa de estudos publicados de janeiro de 2008 a dezembro de 2013, de acordo com critérios de inclusão e exclusão, nas bases de dados eletrônicas MEDLINE e EMBASE.

RESULTADOS

foram analisados 47 estudos de texto completo, incluindo 14,624,492 idosos (≥ 60 anos): 24 (51,1%) sobre RAM, 14 (29,8%) sobre IM e 9 estudos (19,1%) que investigaram tanto IM como RAM. Encontramos uma variedade de desenhos metodológicos. Os estudos revisados reforçaram que a polifarmácia é um processo multifatorial, e os preditores e a prescrição inadequada estão associados a resultados negativos de saúde, como aumento da frequência e tipos de RAM e IM envolvendo diferentes classes de drogas, além disso, alguns estudos mostram as intervenções mais bem-sucedidas para otimizar a prescrição.

CONCLUSÕES

IM e RAM entre idosos continuam a ser um problema significativo no mundo todo. Os resultados dos estudos incluídos nesta revisão integrativa, adicionado às revisões anteriores, podem contribuir para a melhoria das práticas avançadas de enfermagem geriátrica, para promover a segurança dos pacientes idosos em polifarmácia. No entanto, são necessárias mais pesquisas para elucidar lacunas.

OBJETIVO

identificar y resumir los estudios que analizan tanto las interacciones medicamentosas (IM) como las reacciones adversas a medicamentos (RAM) en los adultos mayores polimedicados.

MÉTODOS

revisión integradora de estudios publicados entre enero de 2008 a diciembre de 2013, siguiendo criterios de inclusión y exclusión, en las bases de datos electrónicas MEDLINE y EMBASE.

RESULTADOS

cuarenta y siete estudios de texto completo incluidos fueron analizados incluyendo 14,624,492 adultos mayores (≥ 60 años), de ellos 24 (51,1%) en relación con RAM, 14 (29,9%) con IM y 9 estudios (19,1%) que investigaron tanto IM como RAM. Encontramos una gran variedad de diseños metodológicos. Los estudios revisados reforzaron el concepto que la polifarmacia es un proceso multifactorial, y los predictores y la prescripción inadecuada se asocian con resultados negativos para la salud tales como el aumento de la frecuencia y tipos de RAM y IM implicando diferentes clases de fármacos, además que algunos estudios muestran cuales son las intervenciones más exitosas para optimizar la prescripción.

CONCLUSIONES

IM y RAM siguen siendo un problema importante en el mundo entero entre los adultos mayores. Los resultados de los estudios incluidos en esta revisión integradora, sumado a las revisiones previas, pueden contribuir a la mejora de las prácticas avanzadas de enfermería geriátrica, para promover la seguridad de los pacientes de mayor edad en la polifarmacia. Sin embargo, se necesita más investigación para esclarecer los vacíos de conocimiento.

Risk of prescribing errors in acutely admitted patients: a pilot study

Background Prescribing errors in emergency settings occur frequently. Knowing which patients have the highest risk of errors could improve patient outcomes. Objective The aim of this study was to test an algorithm designed to assess prescribing error risk in individual patients, and to test the feasibility of medication reviews in high-risk patients. Setting The study was performed at the Acute Admissions Unit at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. Methods The study was an interventional pilot study. Patients included were assessed according to risk of prescribing errors with the aid of an algorithm called 'Medication Risk Score' (MERIS). Based on the score, high-risk patients were offered a medication review. The clinical relevance of the medication reviews was assessed retrospectively. Main outcome measure The number and nature of prescribing errors during the patients' hospitalisation. Results The study included 103 patients, all of whom could be risk assessed with the algorithm MERIS. MERIS stratified 38 patients as high-risk patients and 65 as low-risk patients. The 103 patients were prescribed a total of 848 drugs in which 88 prescribing errors were found (10.4 %). Sixty-two of these were found in patients in the high-risk group. In general, the medication reviews were found to be clinically relevant and approximately 50 % of recommendations were implemented. Conclusion MERIS was found to be applicable in a clinical setting and stratified most patients with prescribing errors into the high-risk group. The medication reviews were feasible and found to be clinically relevant by most raters.

Do fall-risk-increasing drugs have an impact on mortality in older hip fracture patients? A population-based cohort study

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the mortality in hip fracture patients with regard to use of fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs), by comparing survival in exposed and nonexposed individuals.

Design

This was a general population-based cohort study.

Settings

Data on hip fracture patients were retrieved from three national databases.

Participants

All hip fracture patients aged 60 years or older in a Swedish county in 2006 participated in this study.

Measurements

We studied the mortality in hip fracture patients by comparing those exposed to FRIDs, combinations of FRIDs, and polypharmacy to nonexposed patients, adjusting for age and sex. For survival estimates in patients using four or more FRIDs, a Cox regression analysis was used, adjusting for age, sex, and use of any four or more drugs.

Results

First-year all-cause mortality was 24.6% (N=503) in 2,043 hip fracture patients aged 60 years or older, including 170 males (33.8%) and 333 females (66.2%). Patients prescribed four or more FRIDs, five or more drugs (polypharmacy), psychotropic drugs, and cardiovascular drugs showed significantly increased first-year mortality. Exposure to four or more FRIDs (518 patients, 25.4%) was associated with an increased mortality at 30 days with odds ratios (ORs) 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.44–2.79), 90 days with OR 1.56 (95% CI 1.19–2.04), 180 days with OR 1.54 (95% CI 1.20–1.97), and 365 days with OR 1.43 (95% CI 1.13–1.80). Cox regression analyses adjusted for age, sex, and use of any four or more drugs showed a significantly higher mortality in patients treated with four or more FRIDs at 90 days (P=0.015) and 180 days (P=0.012) compared to patients treated with three or less FRIDs.

Conclusion

First-year all-cause mortality was significantly higher in older hip fracture patients exposed before the fracture to FRIDs, in particular to four or more FRIDs, polypharmacy, psychotropic, and cardiovascular drugs. Interventions aiming to optimize both safety and benefit of drug treatment for older people should include limiting the use of FRIDs.

Mapping clinical pharmacy practice in Swiss hospitals: a cross-sectional study

Background

Clinical pharmacy activities developed significantly in the last decade. The extent and organisation of these activities in Switzerland remained unknown.

Objectives

To map clinical pharmacy services (CPS) provided in Swiss hospitals and to discuss their development focusing on different cultural regions and healthcare systems.

Methods

We enrolled all chief hospital pharmacists affiliated with the Swiss Society of Public Health Administration and Hospital Pharmacists (n=47) for an online survey. We asked them to describe the extent and organisation of CPS concerning patient-related, therapy-related or process-related activities, the structural organisation and the available human resources.

Results

The survey took place from March to April 2013. It was completed by 44 chief hospital pharmacists (return rate 94%), representing the hospital landscape in Switzerland comprehensively. Thirty-three (75%) hospitals offered regular CPS and seven (16%) planned to do so. Institutions in regions without drug-dispensing physicians rather employed pharmacists assigned with clinical activities (n=20, 22% of 135.3 full-time equivalent (FTE)) than regions with partial (n=8, 7% of 35.8 FTE) or unrestricted drug dispensing by physicians (n=16, 6% of 68.1 FTE, p=0.026). Of hospitals with implemented CPS, 73% had weekly interprofessional ward rounds, and in 9.1%, clinical pharmacists daily reconciled medicines at patient discharge.

Conclusions

Our data show regional differences in the implementation and pattern of CPS. A significant correlation to drug dispensing by physicians in ambulatory care and human resources provided for CPS was found. While interprofessional ward rounds were performed periodically, seamless care activities by clinical pharmacists remained insufficiently established.

Medication review in hospitalised patients to reduce morbidity and mortality

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapy in the elderly population is complicated by several factors that increase the risk of drug-related harms and less favourable effectiveness. The concept of medication review is a key element in improving the quality of prescribing and in preventing adverse drug events. Although there is no generally accepted definition of medication review, it can be broadly defined as a systematic assessment of pharmacotherapy for an individual patient that aims to optimise patient medication by providing a recommendation or by making a direct change. Medication review performed in adult hospitalised patients may lead to better patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

We examined whether delivery of a medication review by a physician, pharmacist or other healthcare professional leads to improvement in health outcomes of hospitalised adult patients compared with standard care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) to November 2014, as well as International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and Web of Science to May 2015. In addition, we searched reference lists of included trials and relevant reviews. We searched trials registries and contacted experts to identify additional published and unpublished trials. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of medication review in hospitalised adult patients. We excluded trials of outclinic and paediatric patients. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes included hospital readmissions, emergency department contacts and adverse drug events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently included trials, extracted data and assessed trials for risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for clarification of data and for additional unpublished data. We calculated risk ratios for dichotomous data and mean differences for continuous data (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). The GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to assess the overall certainty of evidence for the most important outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 6600 references (4647 references in our initial review) and included 10 trials (3575 participants). Follow-up ranged from 30 days to one year. Nine trials provided mortality data (3218 participants, 466 events), with a risk ratio of 1.02 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.19) (low-certainty evidence). Seven trials provided hospital readmission data (2843 participants, 1043 events) with a risk ratio of 0.95 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.04) (high-certainty evidence). Four trials provided emergency department contact data (1442 participants, 244 events) with a risk ratio of 0.73 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.03) (low-certainty evidence). The estimated reduction in emergency department contacts of 27% (with a CI ranging from 48% reduction to 3% increase in contacts) corresponds to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome of 37 for a low-risk population and 12 for a high-risk population over one year. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not significantly alter our results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that medication review reduces mortality or hospital readmissions, although we did find evidence that medication review may reduce emergency department contacts. However, because of short follow-up ranging from 30 days to one year, important treatment effects may have been overlooked. High-quality trials with long-term follow-up (i.e. at least up to a year) are needed to provide more definitive evidence for the effect of medication review on clinically important outcomes such as mortality, readmissions and emergency department contacts, and on outcomes such as adverse events. Therefore, if used in clinical practice, medication reviews should be undertaken as part of a clinical trial with long-term follow-up.

Pharmacist-Led Medication Reviews to Identify and Collaboratively Resolve Drug-Related Problems in Psychiatry - A Controlled, Clinical Trial

Aim of the study

This prospective, controlled trial aimed to assess the effect of pharmacist-led medication reviews on the medication safety of psychiatric inpatients by the resolution of Drug-Related Problems (DRP). Both the therapy appropriateness measured with the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and the number of unsolved DRP per patient were chosen as primary outcome measures.

Methods

Depending on their time of admission, 269 psychiatric patients that were admitted to a psychiatric university hospital were allocated in control (09/2012-03/2013) or intervention group (05/2013-12/2013). In both groups, DRP were identified by comprehensive medication reviews by clinical pharmacists at admission, during the hospital stay, and at discharge. In the intervention group, recommendations for identified DRP were compiled by the pharmacists and discussed with the therapeutic team. In the control group, recommendations were not provided except for serious or life threatening DRP. As a primary outcome measure, the changes in therapy appropriateness from admission to discharge as well as from admission to three months after discharge (follow-up) assessed with the MAI were compared between both groups. The second primary outcome was the number of unsolved DRP per patient after completing the study protocol. The DRP type, the relevance and the potential of drugs to cause DRP were also evaluated.

Results

The intervention led to a reduced MAI score by 1.4 points per patient (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.8–2.0) at discharge and 1.3 points (95% CI: 0.7–1.9) at follow-up compared with controls. The number of unsolved DRP in the intervention group was 1.8 (95% CI: 1.5–2.1) less than in control.

Conclusion

The pharmaceutical medication reviews with interdisciplinary discussion of identified DRP appears to be a worthy strategy to improve medication safety in psychiatry as reflected by less unsolved DRP per patient and an enhanced appropriateness of therapy. The promising results of this trial likely warrant further research that evaluates direct clinical outcomes and health-related costs.

Trial Registration

Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (DRKS), DRKS00006358

Drug-related problems identification in general internal medicine: The impact and role of the clinical pharmacist and pharmacologist

BACKGROUND

Patients admitted to general internal medicine wards might receive a large number of drugs and be at risk for drug-related problems (DRPs) associated with increased morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to detect suboptimal drug use in internal medicine by a pharmacotherapy evaluation, to suggest treatment optimizations and to assess the acceptance and satisfaction of the prescribers.

METHODS

This was a 6-month prospective study conducted in two internal medicine wards. Physician rounds were attended by a pharmacist and a pharmacologist. An assessment grid was used to detect the DRPs in electronic prescriptions 24h in advance. One of the following interventions was selected, depending on the relevance and complexity of the DRPs: no intervention, verbal advice of treatment optimization, or written consultation. The acceptance rate and satisfaction of prescribers were measured.

RESULTS

In total, 145 patients were included, and 383 DRPs were identified (mean: 2.6 DRPs per patient). The most frequent DRPs were drug interactions (21%), untreated indications (18%), overdosages (16%) and drugs used without a valid indication (10%). The drugs or drug classes most frequently involved were tramadol, antidepressants, acenocoumarol, calcium-vitamin D, statins, aspirin, proton pump inhibitors and paracetamol. The following interventions were selected: no intervention (51%), verbal advice of treatment optimization (42%), and written consultation (7%). The acceptance rate of prescribers was 84% and their satisfaction was high.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacotherapy expertise during medical rounds was useful and well accepted by prescribers. Because of the modest allocation of pharmacists and pharmacologists in Swiss hospitals, complementary strategies would be required.

Development of an Aggregated System for Classifying Causes of Drug-Related Problems

Background: More than 20 different types of classification systems for drug-related problems (DRPs) and their causes have been developed. Classification is necessary to describe and assess clinical, organizational, and economic impacts of DRPs through documentation of collected data. However, many researchers have judged classification systems incomplete when describing their data, and have modified them or developed their own. This variability between systems has made study comparisons difficult. Objectives: To perform a category-by-category comparison of the content of selected DRP classification systems to construct an aggregated cause-of-DRP classification system containing the content of all systems. Method: DRP classification systems were identified after a literature review, with 7 chosen based on their use in varied health care settings, geographical diversity, frequency of use, and method of development. These systems were critically analyzed, and the content of each category was compared and aggregated where appropriate. A hierarchy of categories was constructed to include all content from all systems. Any modifications that previous studies may have made to the 7 systems were also cross-referenced to ensure that no concepts were missing from the newly aggregated system. Clinical examples to optimize application, and instructions for when or when not to use categories, were developed. Interrater agreement for classification of the causes of DRPs from 10 medication reviews was performed between 3 clinical pharmacists and the authors’ gold standard. Results: We found variation in developmental methods, category descriptions, number and types of categories, and validation methods between the 7 selected systems, together with intermingling of categories identified as causes of DRPs with DRPs themselves. A hierarchical classification system was constructed consisting of 9 cause-of-DRP categories, 33 subcategories, and 58 sub-subcategories, for which interrater agreements were 82.5%, 74.6%, and 58.8%, respectively. Conclusion: An aggregated classification system was constructed through a unique and transparent developmental process that may provide the most comprehensive description of causes of DRPs to date. This may facilitate teaching of pharmaceutical care, comparisons of clinical practice, and measurement of the effectiveness of pharmaceutical care interventions.

Multidisciplinary intervention reducing readmissions in medical inpatients: a prospective, non-randomized study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine whether a multidisciplinary intervention targeting drug-related problems, cognitive impairment, and discharge miscommunication could reduce readmissions in a general hospital population.

METHODS

This prospective, non-randomized intervention study was carried out at the department of general internal medicine at a tertiary university hospital. Two hundred medical inpatients living in the community and aged over 60 years were included. Ninety-nine patients received interventions and 101 received standard care. Control/intervention allocation was determined by geographic selection. Interventions consisted of a comprehensive medication review, improved discharge planning, post-discharge telephone follow-up, and liaison with the patient's general practitioner. The main outcome measures recorded were readmissions and hospital nights 12 months after discharge. Separate analyses were made for 12-month survivors and from an intention-to-treat perspective. Comparative analyses were made between groups as well as within groups over time.

RESULTS

After 12 months, survivors in the control group had 125 readmissions in total, compared with 58 in the intervention group (Mann-Whitney U test, P = 0.02). For hospital nights, the numbers were 1,228 and 492, respectively (P = 0.009). Yearly admissions had increased from the previous year in the control group from 77 to 125 (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, P = 0.002) and decreased from 75 to 58 in the intervention group (P = 0.25). From the intention-to-treat perspective, the same general pattern was observed but was not significant (1,827 versus 1,008 hospital nights, Mann-Whitney test, P = 0.054).

CONCLUSION

A multidisciplinary approach, targeting several different areas, could substantially lower readmissions and hospital costs in a non-terminal general hospital population.

Health economic evaluation of the Lund Integrated Medicines Management Model (LIMM) in elderly patients admitted to hospital

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost effectiveness of a multidisciplinary team including a pharmacist for systematic medication review and reconciliation from admission to discharge at hospital among elderly patients (the Lund Integrated Medicines Management (LIMM)) in order to reduce drug-related readmissions and outpatient visits.

METHOD

Published data from the LIMM project group were used to design a probabilistic decision tree model for evaluating tools for (1) a systematic medication reconciliation and review process at initial hospital admission and during stay (admission part) and (2) a medication report for patients discharged from hospital to primary care (discharge part). The comparator was standard care. Inpatient, outpatient and staff time costs (Euros, 2009) were calculated during a 3-month period. Dis-utilities for hospital readmissions and outpatient visits due to medication errors were taken from the literature.

RESULTS

The total cost for the LIMM model was €290 compared to €630 for standard care, in spite of a €39 intervention cost. The main cost offset arose from avoided drug-related readmissions in the Admission part (€262) whereas only €66 was offset in the Discharge part as a result of fewer outpatient visits and correction time. The reduced disutility was estimated to 0.005 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), indicating that LIMM was a dominant alternative. The probability that the intervention would be cost-effective at a zero willingness to pay for a gained QALY compared to standard care was estimated to 98%.

CONCLUSIONS

The LIMM medication reconciliation (at admission and discharge) and medication review was both cost-saving and generated greater utility compared to standard care, foremost owing to avoided drug-related hospital readmissions. When implementing such a review process with a multidisciplinary team, it may be important to consider a learning curve in order to capture the full advantage.