Improving pre-operative medicines reconciliation

Impact of a policy to improve the management of oral medications when patients are fasting before a procedure: an interrupted time series analysis

Background

Managing medications inappropriately when patients have oral intake restrictions can cause patient harm. This study evaluated the impact of a medication policy separating fasting from nil by mouth with respect to giving oral medications in patients fasting before a diagnostic or interventional procedure.

Methods

The policy stipulated that ‘fasting’ means oral medications should be given with a sip of water up to 1 hour before a procedure, unless there is a clinical reason to withhold, while ‘nil by mouth’ means nothing to be given orally, including medications.

The policy was implemented in Surgical areas in February 2015 and Medical areas in March 2015 at a tertiary referral hospital in Melbourne, Australia, and included bedside signs, clinical champions and education sessions.

The study was conducted in 2020. Admission and medication records were matched for non-elective procedure patients from January 2014 to May 2016. The monthly proportion of doses omitted inappropriately and overall omissions pre/post-policy implementation were compared using segmented regression.

Results

Pre-implementation, the proportion of doses withheld inappropriately and total omissions in medical areas were 18.1% and 28.0%, respectively. Post-implementation, an absolute reduction of 13.4% (95% CI 9.0% to 17.7%) and 11.1% (95% CI 2.6% to 19.6%), respectively, was seen. Post-implementation linear trend showed a 0.3% (95% CI 0.0% to 0.6%) increase in inappropriate omissions but not overall omissions.

In Surgical areas, pre-implementation proportions for inappropriate and overall omissions were lower than Medical areas’. Post-implementation, there was an absolute decrease in doses withheld inappropriately (8.3%, 95% CI 0.8% to 15.7%, from 11.9% pre-implementation) but not total omissions.

Conclusions

Distinguishing fasting from nil by mouth appeared to provide clarity for some staff: a reduction in inappropriate omissions was seen post-implementation. Although the small increase in post-implementation linear trend for inappropriate omissions in Medical areas suggests sustainability issues, total omissions were sustained. The policy’s concepts require verification beyond our institution.

Improved Medication Management With Introduction of a Perioperative and Prescribing Pharmacist Service

BACKGROUND

The medication lists in pre-admission clinic (PAC) questionnaires completed by patients prior to surgery are often inaccurate, potentially leading to medication errors during hospitalization. Studies have shown pharmacists are more accurate when obtaining a medication history and transcribing prescription orders, thereby reducing errors.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a PeRiopErative and Prescribing (PREP) pharmacist on postoperative medication management.

METHODS

A randomized prospective interventional study enrolled elective surgery patients at high risk for medication misadventure to receive PREP pharmacy service or usual care (control group). A best possible medication history (BPMH) was obtained by the PREP pharmacist and was available to surgical staff on admission. The PREP pharmacist also prepared discharge prescriptions for their patients. The primary outcomes for the study were accuracy of BPMH and discharge prescriptions compared to usual care. The study was powered to 80% with 2-tailed significance α of .05.

RESULTS

The medication history in the PREP pharmacist group had fewer errors than the control group: 9% (5/53) versus 96% (49/51; P < .001). Discharge prescriptions prepared by the PREP pharmacist had fewer errors than control group: 25% versus 78% (P < .001). Significantly, more PREP pharmacist patients received a discharge summary with a complete medication list: 75% versus 33% (P = .001). Inpatient prescribing was more accurate in the PREP pharmacist patients: 0.64 versus 1.31 errors per patient (P = .047).

CONCLUSION

Inclusion of the PREP pharmacist role in the elective surgery multidisciplinary team improved the accuracy of medication histories, inpatient prescribing, and discharge prescriptions for patients at high risk of medication misadventure.

Are we meeting current standards in medicines reconciliation? A study in a District General Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Inadequate medicines reconciliation on admission is often identified as a major cause of patient morbidity, with poor access to patient's regular medications often cited as a barrier to care. In the surgical admission unit of our district general hospital, drug charts are completed by junior doctors who do not have access to the Emergency Care Summary (ECS) thus making it difficult to accurately complete admission drug charts.

METHODS

Our initial measurement of all acute surgical admissions revealed that 49% of patients had an accurate medicines reconciliation upon admission, increasing to 75% within 24 hours of admission. It was clear from this data that our current practice needed improvement in order to ensure patient safety. Resultantly the junior medical staff were provided with ECS accounts and teaching to aid the process of medicines reconciliation.

RESULTS

Following the introduction of access to ECS and junior doctor education, a further two data cycles were completed. On the first cycle, the number of accurately completed drug charts increased to 62% on admission and 86% at 24 hours. After the second cycle 57% were complete on admission increasing to 84% at 24 hours.

CONCLUSION

Our project has shown that by providing junior doctors with medicines reconciliation education and access to patients' pre-admission medications through a nationwide electronic system resulted in a considerable increase in the completion of medicine reconciliation.