Pharmacist- versus physician-acquired medication history: a prospective study at the emergency department

Medication use in a cohort of adults with chronic intestinal failure: A prospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Oral drug therapy may be compromised in chronic intestinal failure (IF) because of alterations in absorption and transit. Only scarce literature is available on which medication patients with chronic IF take in daily life. The aim was to describe the medication use in these patients.

METHODS

A medication history was obtained from adults with chronic IF treated in our tertiary care IF center. Degree of polypharmacy, drug classes, Biopharmaceutics Classification System classes, route of administration, and formulation of drugs were analyzed.

RESULTS

From October 2019 until December 2020, 72 patients (35 patients with short bowel syndrome [SBS] and 37 patients without SBS) were included. Polypharmacy was seen in 85.7% of patients with SBS and 75.7% of patients without SBS. The top three drug classes were proton-pump inhibitors, vitamin D or acetaminophen, and antimotility medication or laxatives/benzodiazepines. Approximately 25% of the drugs were classified as Biopharmaceutics Classification System class I drugs. In patients with SBS (78%) and patients without SBS (74.9%), most medication was taken orally, requiring gastrointestinal absorption of the active substance to be pharmacologically active. Most of these medications (77% in patients with SBS and 80.8% in patients without SBS) were formulated as a capsule or tablet, requiring disintegration and dissolution in the gastrointestinal tract before absorption can take place.

CONCLUSION

Polypharmacy was observed in most patients with chronic IF. Most medication was taken orally in formulations requiring disintegration, dissolution, and gastrointestinal absorption, which could be compromised in chronic IF.

Primary care electronic medication record discrepancies in patients starting treatment at a hospital-based ambulatory care pharmacy and impact on prevalence of potential drug-drug interactions

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the prevalence of discrepancies between primary care electronic medication records (EMR) and patient reported medication (PRM) in ambulatory patients starting a hospital dispensing treatment (HDT) at a hospital-based ambulatory care pharmacy (HACPh). Our secondary aims were to analyse factors associated with the presence of discrepancies and their impact on the prevalence of potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with the HDT.

METHODS

Retrospective study including 230 patients starting a HDT at the HACPh. Pharmacists interviewed patients and PRM was compared with EMR. Discrepancies were classified as omissions (medication in the PRM not present in the EMR) and commissions (medication active in the EMR that the patients were not taking). Potential DDIs with the HDT were screened, and univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to detect factors associated with the presence of discrepancies.

RESULTS

We identified 221 discrepancies in 116 (50.4%) patients. Being visited by three or more medical specialties (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.37) and attending private healthcare (OR 4.36, 95% CI 1.14 to 16.72) in the 12 months before the study inclusion were the factors independently associated with the presence of discrepancies. Among patients with commissions (n=91), 15.4% had a potential DDI between the HDT and one medication from the EMR that they were not taking at that moment. Among patients with omissions (n=45), 11.1% had a potential DDI between the HDT and a medication in the PRM not present in the EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

About 40% of patients had one or more medications in the EMR which they were not taking and one fifth used medications that were not listed in the EMR. EMR should not be used as the only source of information when screening for DDIs, especially in patients followed by different medical specialties or combining private and public healthcare.

Patient participation during discharge medication counselling: Observing real-life communication between healthcare professionals and patients

OBJECTIVES

Previous studies on hospital discharge showed limited patient involvement, despite its positive outcomes. In this study, provider-patient communication used to enhance patient participation during discharge medication counselling was examined.

METHODS

This study comprises a qualitative descriptive observational study. Thirty-four discharge consultations were observed, audio recorded and analysed. We conducted a deductive analysis, elaborating on findings from earlier research. We selected themes and underlying codes illustrating professional-patient communication. For every theme, we identified examples to demonstrate its manifestation during discharge medication counselling. We also assessed what information healthcare professionals (HCPs) shared.

RESULTS

HCPs used cues to increase patient participation, e.g. inquired about patient's preferences, showed empathy and support, and verified understanding of information shared. Patient participation occurred through asking questions, and expressing concerns. A central component in discharge medication counselling was the transmission of information from HCPs to patients. This resulted in HCPs taking a leading role.

CONCLUSIONS

Several HCP cues were detected inviting patients to participate in consultations. Some patients participated in discharge medication counselling. This was influenced by timing of discharge consults, the performing HCP and presence of a relative.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

HCPs shared a lot of information with patients. However, this does not automatically mean that patients will be able to understand and apply this information. HCPs should understand the importance of using cues to enable patient participation. One example is using the teach-back method for verifying patient understanding. It may also be desirable to ensure that a relative is present when discharge information is offered.

Accuracy of best possible medication histories by pharmacy students: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Medication reconciliation is an effective strategy to prevent medication errors upon hospital admission and requires obtaining a patient's best possible mediation history (BPMH). However, obtaining a BPMH is time-consuming and pharmacy students may assist pharmacists in this task.

AIM

To evaluate the proportion of patients who have an accurate BPMH from the pharmacy student-obtained BPMH compared to the pharmacist-obtained BPMH.

METHOD

Twelve final-year pharmacy students were trained to obtain BPMHs upon admission at 2 tertiary hospitals and worked in pairs. Each student pair completed one 8-h shift each week for 8 weeks. Students obtained BPMHs for patients taking 5 or more medications. A pharmacist then independently obtained and checked the student BPMH from the same patient for accuracy. Deviations were determined between student-obtained and pharmacist-obtained BMPH. An accurate BPMH was defined as only having no-or-low risk medication deviations.

RESULTS

The pharmacy students took BPMHs for 91 patients. Of these, 65 patients (71.4%) had an accurate BPMH. Of the 1170 medications included in patients' BPMH, 1118 (95.6%) were deemed accurate. For the student-obtained BPMHs, they were more likely to be accurate for patients who were older (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.03-1.06; p < 0.001), had fewer medications (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.75-0.97; p = 0.02), and if students used two source types (administration and supplier) to obtain the BPMH (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.09-2.50; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

It is suitable for final-year pharmacy students to be incorporated into the BPMHs process and for their BPMHs to be verified for accuracy by a pharmacist.

Impact of pharmacist interventions provided in the emergency department on quality use of medicines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacists have an increasing role as part of the emergency department (ED) team. However, the impact of ED-based pharmacy interventions on the quality use of medicines has not been well characterised.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to synthesise evidence from studies examining the impact of interventions provided by pharmacists on the quality use of medicines in adults presenting to ED.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. Two independent reviewers screened titles/abstracts and reviewed full texts. Studies that compared the impact of interventions provided by pharmacists with usual care in ED and reported medication-related primary outcomes were included. Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 and Newcastle-Ottawa tools were used to assess the risk of bias. Summary estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis, along with sensitivity and sub-group analyses.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies involving 13 242 participants were included. Pharmacists were predominantly involved in comprehensive medication review, advanced pharmacotherapy assessment, staff and patient education, identification of medication discrepancies and drug-related problems, medication prescribing and co-prescribing, and medication preparation and administration. The activities reduced the number of medication errors by a mean of 0.33 per patient (95% CI -0.42 to -0.23, I²=51%) and the proportion of patients with at least one error by 73% (risk ratio (RR)=0.27, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.40, I²=85.3%). The interventions were also associated with more complete and accurate medication histories, increased appropriateness of prescribed medications by 58% (RR=1.58, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.06, I²=95%) and quicker initiation of time-critical medications.

CONCLUSION

The evidence indicates improved quality use of medicines when pharmacists are included in ED care teams.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020165234.

Overcoming Barriers in Nurse-Pharmacist Collaborations on Wards - Qualitative Expert Interviews with Nurses and Pharmacists

Purpose

Interprofessional collaboration in healthcare is an essential element in promoting patient safety. However, little research is available on the collaboration between nurses and pharmacists. To optimize processes, mutual understanding is needed, which can be gained by examining the perspectives of those collaborating professional groups. We aimed to identify barriers to the interprofessional collaboration of nurses and pharmacists as well as preconditions and solution strategies to devise approaches for optimizing teamwork in inpatient settings.

Methods

We recruited pairs of collaborating nurses and pharmacists from different hospitals in German-speaking countries and conducted qualitative expert interviews by phone with each of them individually. Transcribed interviews were assessed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

We conducted 12 interviews each with the collaborating nurses and pharmacists. The most frequently mentioned barriers to optimal collaboration were "skepticism due to perception as controller" (reported mainly by pharmacists), "organizational implementation", and "limited (possibilities of) presence" (reported by both professional groups). A solution strategy proposed to overcome such barriers was "explaining added value". This added value was found in "clinical-pharmaceutical activities as complement by additional perspective" and "reducing workload in tasks distant from the patient".

Conclusion

Nurses, pharmacists and hospital management should recognize the added value of intensifying their collaboration regarding patient-related services. A combination of logistical and clinical-pharmaceutical activities should be established at the level of drug application since interviewees endorsed collaboration. A stepwise process must be anticipated to address existing barriers, including some redefinition of professional roles.

What is the evidence that a pharmacy team working in an acute or emergency medicine department improves outcomes for patients: A systematic review

Pharmacy services within hospitals are changing, with more taking on medication reconciliation activities. This systematic review was conducted to determine the measured impacts of Pharmacy teams working in an acute or emergency medicine department. The protocol followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was prospectively registered on PROSPERO, National Institute for Health and Care Research, UK registration number: CRD42020187487. The systematic review had two co-primary aims: a reduction in the number of incorrect prescriptions on admission by comparing the medication list from primary care to secondary care, and a reduction in the severity of harm caused by these incorrect prescriptions; chosen to determine the impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation services in the emergency and acute medicine setting. Seventeen articles were included. Fifteen were non-randomized controlled trials and two were randomized controlled trials. The number of patients combined for all studies was 7630. No studies included were based within the UK. All studies showed benefits in terms of a reduction in medicine errors and patient harm, compared to control arms. Nine articles were included in a statistical analysis comparing the pharmacy intervention arm with the non-pharmacy control arm, with a Chi2 of 101.10 and I2 value = 92%. However, studies were heterogenous with different outcome measures and many showed evidence of bias. The included studies consistently indicated that pharmacy services based within acute or emergency medicine departments in hospitals were associated with fewer medication errors. Further studies are needed to understand the health and economic impact of deploying a pharmacy service in acute medical settings including out-of-hours working.

Implementing a New Electronic Health Record System in a University Hospital: The Effect on Reported Medication Errors

Closed-loop electronic medication management systems (EMMS) have been seen as a potential technology to prevent medication errors (MEs), although the research on them is still limited. The aim of this paper was to describe the changes in reported MEs in Helsinki University Hospital (HUS) during and after implementing an EPIC-based electronic health record system (APOTTI), with the first features of a closed-loop EMMS. MEs reported from January 2018 to May 2021 were analysed to identify changes in ME trends with quantitative analysis. Severe MEs were also analysed via qualitative content analysis. A total of 30% (n = 23,492/79,272) of all reported patient safety incidents were MEs. Implementation phases momentarily increased the ME reporting, which soon decreased back to the earlier level. Administration and dispensing errors decreased, but medication reconciliation, ordering, and prescribing errors increased. The ranking of the TOP 10 medications related to MEs remained relatively stable. There were 92 severe MEs related to APOTTI (43% of all severe MEs). The majority of these (55%, n = 53) were related to use and user skills, 24% (n = 23) were technical failures and flaws, and 21% (n = 21) were related to both. Using EMMS required major changes in the medication process and new technical systems and technology. Our medication-use process is approaching a closed-loop system, which seems to provide safer dispensing and administration of medications. However, medication reconciliation, ordering, and prescribing still need to be improved.

Risk factors associated with unintentional medication discrepancies at admission in an internal medicine department

At admission, unintentional medication discrepancies (UMDs) can occur and may led to severe adverse events. Some of them are preventable through medication reconciliation (MR). As MR is a time-consuming activity, a better identification of high-risk patients of UMDs is mandatory. The objective was to identify risk factors associated with UMDs at admission in an internal medicine department. This prospective observational study was conducted from April 2017 to June 2019. At admission, inpatients had MR to obtain a complete list of home medications. This list was compared to prescriptions made at admission. All discrepancies were classified as intentional or UMDs. Univariate and multivariate analyses to identify the risk factors associated with UMDs were performed. MR was performed on 1157 patients (70.1 ± 16.8 years old); 550 MR (47.5%) contained at least one UMD. More than half of the UMDs (n = 892, 65.6%) corresponded to drug omission. The univariate analysis showed that age (> 60 years old), "living at home", medication preparation not performed by patient, medication-intake difficulties, number of sources consulted, MR duration, presence of a high-risk drug and the number of home medications were associated with UMDs. In the multivariate analysis, adjusted on the number of sources consulted, independent risk factors were "living at home" and the number of home medications. At admission to an internal medicine department, UMDs were frequent and associated with "living at home" and poly-medication. Our findings might help physicians to identify high-risk patients of UMDs since their admission.

Knowledge of the Use of Herbal Medicines among Community Pharmacists and Reporting Their Adverse Drug Reactions

Introduction:

Community pharmacist’s knowledge about the uses of herbal medicines and its adverse drug reactions reporting can contribute in better therapeutic outcomes and patient safety. Objectives: To evaluate community pharmacists’ knowledge about the use of herbal medicines and its adverse drug reactions reporting in Kedah state, Malaysia.

Methods:

A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted among 103 pharmacists from 74 different community pharmacies to assess their knowledge about the use of herbal medicines and its adverse drug reaction reporting by using a pre-validate knowledge questionnaire consisting of 12 questions related to it. The pharmacists’ responses were measured at a 3-point Likert scale (Poor=1, Moderate=2, and Good=3) and data was entered in SPSS version 22. The minimum and maximum possible scores for knowledge questionnaires were 12 and 36 respectively. Quantitative data was analyzed by using One Way ANOVA and Paired t-test whereas Chi-square and Fisher exact test were used for qualitative data analysis. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all the analyses.

Results:

About 92% of the pharmacist had good knowledge regarding the use of herbal medicines and its adverse drug reaction reporting with a mean knowledge score of 32.88±3.16. One-way ANOVA determined a significant difference of employment setting (p<0.043) and years of experience (<0.008) with mean knowledge scores of Pharmacists. Pharmacists’ knowledge was significantly associated with their years of experience with the Chi-square test.

Conclusion:

Pharmacists exhibit good knowledge regarding the use of herbal medicines and its adverse drug reaction reporting. However, with an increasing trend of herbal medicine use and its adverse drug reaction reporting it recalls the empowerment of experienced pharmacists with training programs in this area for better clinical outcomes.

Developing an Integrated Electronic Medication Reconciliation Platform and Evaluating its Effects on Preventing Potential Duplicated Medications and Reducing 30-Day Medication-Related Hospital Revisits for Inpatients

The aims were to develop an integrated electronic medication reconciliation (ieMR) platform, evaluate its effects on preventing potential duplicated medications, analyze the distribution of the potential duplicated medications by the Anatomical Therapeutic and Chemical (ATC) code for all inpatients, and determine the rate of 30-day medication-related hospital revisits for a geriatric unit. The study was conducted in a tertiary medical center in Taiwan and involved a retrospective quasi pre-intervention (July 1-November 30, 2015) and post-intervention (October 1-December 31, 2016) study design. A multidisciplinary team developed the ieMR platform covering the process from admission to discharge. The ieMR platform included six modules of an enhanced computer physician order entry system (eCPOE), Pharmaceutical-care, Holistic Care, Bedside Display, Personalized Best Possible Medication Discharge Plan, and Pharmaceutical Care Registration System. The ieMR platform prevented the number of potential duplicated medications from pre (25,196 medications, 2.3%) to post (23,413 medications, 3.8%) phases (OR 1.71, 95% CI, 1.68-1.74; p < .001). The most common potential duplicated medications classified by the ATC codes were cardiovascular system (28.4%), alimentary tract and metabolism (26.4%), and nervous system (14.9%), and by chemical substances were sennoside (12.5%), amlodipine (7.5%), and alprazolam (7.4%). The rate of medication-related 30-day hospital revisits for the geriatric unit was significantly decreased in post-intervention compared with that in pre-intervention (OR = 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03-0.53; p < .01). This study indicated that the ieMR platform significantly prevented the number of potential duplicated medications for inpatients and reduced the rate of 30-day medication-related hospital revisits for the patients on the geriatric unit.

Role of Nutrition Education in Pharmacy Curriculum-Students' Perspectives and Attitudes

Many pharmacists report they lack nutritional knowledge and believe the best time to educate pharmacists about nutrition is during pharmacy school. Purpose: This study was conducted to determine if today’s pharmacy students receive education in nutrition and if they realize the importance of a nutrition course. Methods: Ninety-five pharmacy students attending pharmacy school were surveyed in two pharmacy schools in the United States. Results: The survey showed only 13.7% received nutrition education and 82.9% of students believed nutrition education should be incorporated into the pharmacy degree curriculum. When the pharmacy-related experience was taken into account, 73.3% of students believed that a nutrition course should be incorporated into the curriculum. Conclusion: This study suggests that pharmacy students from two major universities in Alabama and Illinois realize the importance of nutrition education and believe a nutrition course should be incorporated into the pharmacy degree curriculum.

Completeness of Medication Reconciliation Performed by Pediatric Resident Physicians at Hospital Admission for Asthma

BACKGROUND

Medication errors at hospital admission, though preventable, continue to be common. The process of medication reconciliation has been identified as an important tool in reducing medication errors. The first step in medication reconciliation involves documenting a patient's best possible medication history (BPMH); at the authors' tertiary pediatric hospital, this step is completed at time of admission by resident physicians.

OBJECTIVES

To describe and quantify the completeness of admission BPMH by resident physicians for pediatric inpatients with asthma.

METHODS

This single-centre, retrospective chart review evaluated documentation of admission medication reconciliation for pediatric inpatients with asthma who were admitted between January 2016 and December 2017. Medication reconciliation forms were deemed incomplete if records for asthma medications were missing drug name, inhaler strength or oral drug dose, directions for use, or evidence of reconciliation.

RESULTS

A total of 241 charts were evaluated, of which 97 (40%) had incomplete documentation for at least 1 medication; in particular, 48 (37%) of the 130 inhaled corticosteroid orders were missing inhaler strength. For most of the charts with incomplete medication history (68% [66/97]), no reason was documented; however, review of the medication reconciliation forms and physician notes revealed that families might have been unsure of a patient's home medications or physicians might have left it to the pharmacy to clarify medication doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Documentation of inhaler medications on admission medication reconciliation forms completed by resident physicians for pediatric patients with asthma was often incomplete. Future quality improvement interventions, including resident and patient education, are required at the study institution. Collaboration with pharmacy services is also likely to improve completeness of the medication reconciliation process.

Recognition of a disulfiram ethanol reaction in the emergency department is not always straightforward

OBJECTIVES

Disulfiram is an adjunct in the treatment of alcohol use disorders, but case reports indicate that disulfiram ethanol reactions are not always recognized in the emergency department. Our first aim is to remind of this risk with two case reports of life-threatening reactions not immediately considered by the emergency physician. The second aim is to estimate the probability that a disulfiram reaction goes unrecognized with the use of a retrospective study of patients admitted to the emergency department.

METHODS

Clinical files of patients admitted between October 1, 2010 and September 30, 2014 to the emergency department were retrospectively screened for the key words "ethanol use" and "disulfiram". Their diagnoses were then scored by a panel regarding the probability of an interaction.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients were included, and a disulfiram-ethanol reaction was scored as either 'highly likely', 'likely' or 'possible' in 54.4% and as 'doubtful' or 'certainly not present' in 45.6% of the patients. The interrater agreement was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.64-0.79). The diagnosis was not considered or only after a delay in 44.2% of the patients with a 'possible' to 'highly likely' disulfiram interaction. One patient with a disulfiram overdose died and was considered as a 'possible' interaction.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

A disulfiram ethanol interaction can be life threatening and failure to consider the diagnosis in the emergency department seems frequent. Prospective studies with documentation of the intake of disulfiram and evaluation of the value of acetaldehyde as a biomarker are needed to determine the precise incidence. Improving knowledge of disulfiram interactions and adequate history taking of disulfiram intake may improve the care for patients.

Evaluation of the completeness of information sources used to prepare the best possible medication histories at a tertiary teaching hospital in Jordan

OBJECTIVES

In this study we aimed to evaluate the completeness of three different medication information sources that are commonly used to collect and obtain the Best Possible Medication History (BPMH).

METHODS

This is an observational study which was held at Jordan University Hospital. After identifying eligible patients, the BPMH was obtained from three different sources separately. These sources include medical file, pharmacy database, and patients' interview. Information from all of these sources was compiled to create the BPMH. The BPMH was used as the standard against which every other information source was compared and given a "completeness score" according to a systematic scoring system.

RESULTS

Among the 196 participating patients who were included in the study, 113 (57.7%) were recruited from internal medicine and 83 (42.3%) from surgical department. Patients' interview showed the highest median completeness score (71.4%) among the three used sources followed by pharmacy database (35.3%), and medical files (28.2%). The median completeness score for the compiled BPMH obtained by the pharmacist was 93.0%. The compiled BPMH completeness score was inversely proportional to the numbers of medications in the compiled BPMH (R = -.392, P value < .001). Moreover, patients with lower income showed better median BPMH completeness score compared with those with higher income (95.2% (IQR = 16.7%) vs 88.9% (IQR = 15.7%), respectively, P value = .042).

CONCLUSION

The results show that pharmacist's interview with the patients scored the highest percentage of completeness compared with hospital pharmacy database and medical file and is, therefore, considered more comprehensive in obtaining the BPMH.

Medication Reconciliation: The Foundation of Medication Safety for Patients Requiring Dialysis

Medication-related problems are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Patients requiring dialysis are at heightened risk for adverse drug reactions because of the prevalence of polypharmacy, multiple chronic conditions, and altered (but not well understood) medication pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics inherent to kidney failure. To minimize preventable medication-related problems, health care providers need to prioritize medication safety for this population. The cornerstone of medication safety is medication reconciliation. We present a case highlighting adverse outcomes when medication reconciliation is insufficient at care transitions. We review available literature on the prevalence of medication discrepancies worldwide. We also explain effective medication reconciliation and the practical considerations for implementation of effective medication reconciliation in dialysis units. In light of the addition of medication reconciliation requirements to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services End-Stage Renal Disease Quality Incentive Program, this review also provides guidance to dialysis unit leadership for improving current medication reconciliation practices. Prioritization of medication reconciliation has the potential to positively affect rates of medication-related problems, as well as medication adherence, health care costs, and quality of life.

Effect of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation in emergency departments: A systematic review and meta-analysis

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Medication reconciliation is recommended to be performed at every transition of medical care to prevent medication errors or adverse drug events. This study investigated the impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation on medication discrepancies and potential adverse drug events in the ED to assess the benefits of pharmacy services.

METHODS

The systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The PubMed, Ovid Embase and Cochrane library databases were searched up from inception to 1 July 2018. Studies comparing the effectiveness of the medication reconciliation service performed by pharmacy personnel to usual care (nurses or physicians) in the ED were included. Duplicated studies, non-clinical studies, studies with ineligible comparators or study designs were excluded.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Eleven studies were eligible for qualitative analysis, and 8 studies were included in meta-analysis. Pharmacy-led medication reconciliation substantially reduced medication discrepancies in the ED. The most common medication discrepancies included medication omission and incorrect/omitted dose or frequency. Unlike usual care, pharmacy-led medication reconciliation significantly reduced the proportion of patients with medication discrepancies by 68% (response rate 0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.19-0.53, P < .0001) and the number of medication discrepancy events by 88% (response rate 0.12; 95% CI 0.06-0.26, P < .00001). Intervention decreased the number of discrepancies per patient by 3.08 (mean difference -3.08; 95% CI: -4.76 to -1.39, P = .0003). Subgroup analysis revealed no differences between pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in medication reconciliation performance pertaining to medication discrepancies. The patients with several comorbidities or those administered numerous medications received marked benefits related to reduced medication discrepancies from pharmacy-led medication reconciliation. Moreover, a randomized controlled trial revealed decreased risk of potential adverse drug events by pharmacy-led medication reconciliation in patients receiving care in the ED.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Pharmacy-led medication reconciliation significantly decreased the number of medication discrepancies. However, only one study investigated potential adverse drug events in patients receiving care in the ED. Therefore, further studies investigating the direct clinical impact of decreased medication discrepancies are required.

Medication reconciliation in the emergency department performed by pharmacists

Patients are at risk of having their medication histories inaccurately documented while being admitted to an emergency department (ED). Allowing a pharmacist to access patient medication history is an effective way of reducing the number of errors. We sought to determine if having a pharmacist (as opposed to the admitting clinical team) verify patients' medication histories would result in fewer discrepancies in inpatient medication regimens. We performed a prospective cohort comparison study of adult ED patients admitted to general medicine floors for continuing care. In the intervention group, pharmacists in the ED performed a brief inquiry into the patients' medication history, a process called medication reconciliation. In the control group, the admitting clinical team conducted the medication reconciliation. Both groups received a second reconciliation by a trained pharmacy team and all discrepancies were recorded. Our cohort had 172 intervention and 172 control subjects. In the control group, 561 medication discrepancies were recorded while no medication discrepancies were observed in the intervention group. Having pharmacists consult with patients in the ED about their medication histories led to fewer discrepancies than when admitting clinical teams performed the same inquiry.

Health Workers' Perceptions and Expectations of the Role of the Pharmacist in Emergency Units: A Qualitative Study in Kupang, Indonesia

Background. An essential way to ensure patient safety in the hospital is by applying pharmacy services in emergency units. This strategy was implemented in Indonesia several years ago, with the aim of ensuring that adequate pharmacy services are given to patients in hospitals. To achieve this, pharmacists are required to cooperate with other health workers via inter-professional teamwork. This study intended to identify the perceptions and expectations of health workers with respect to pharmacy services in emergency units. Methods. This was a qualitative study, using a phenomenological approach with a semi-structured interview technique to obtain data. This study was performed at the Prof. Dr. W.Z. Johannes Hospital Kupang from June to September 2018. The results of the interviews were thematically analyzed using QSR NVivo software 11. Results. The themes identified in this study included: (1) The positive impact of pharmacists in service; (2) Badan Penyelenggara Jaminan Sosial (BPJS) influence; (3) Acceptance of health workers; (4) Medication administration information; and (5) Expectations of health workers. Various perceptions were conveyed by participants regarding the emergency unit services in the hospital’s pharmaceutical department. Data obtained proved that the existence of a pharmacist increased the efficiency of time for services and prevented human error. Conclusion. Pharmacists and policy-makers play a significant role in providing appropriate pharmaceutical services in emergency units. Pharmacists also need to improve their quality of practice in accordance with their competence. They must review the patient medical history and physician’s prescriptions, educate the patients and other health workers, so that the workload and service time will be reduced.

Medication reconciliation and review for older emergency patients requires improvement in Finland

BACKGROUND:

10–30% of hospital stays by older patients are drug-related. The admission phase is important for identifying drug-related problems, but taking an incorrect medication history often leads to medication errors.

OBJECTIVES:

To enhance medication history recording and identify drug-related problems (DRPs) of older patients admitted to emergency departments (EDs).

METHODS:

DRPs were identified by pharmacists-led medication reconciliation and review procedures in two EDs in Finland; Helsinki University Hospital (HUS), and Kuopio University Hospital (KUH). One-hundred-and-fifty patients aged ≥65-years, living at home and using ≥6 medicines were studied.

RESULTS:

100% of patients (N = 75) in HUS and 99% in KUH (N = 75), had discrepancies in their admission-medication chart recorded by the nurse or physician. Associations between admission-diagnosis and drug-related problems were found in 12 patients (16%) in HUS and 22 patients (29%) in KUH. Of these, high-alert medications (e.g. antithrombotics, cytostatics, opioids) were linked to eight patients (11%) in HUS and six patients (8%) in KUH. Other acute DRPs were identified in 19 patients (25%) in HUS and 54 patients (72%) in KUH. Furthermore, 67 patients (89%) in HUS and all patients in KUH had non-acute DRPs.

CONCLUSIONS:

Medication reconciliation and review at admission of older ED patients requires improvement in Finland.

Accuracy of best possible medication history documentation by pharmacists at an Australian tertiary referral metropolitan hospital

Aim

To determine the quality of best possible medication history (BPMH) taking activities undertaken by pharmacists. To identify factors which impact upon erroneous documentation. To assess risks associated with erroneous documentation of BPMH by pharmacists.

Method

A clinical pharmacist randomly selected patients across a tertiary referral, metropolitan hospital over an 9-day period and documented comparator medication histories (CMHs) using a structured interview. BPMH documented by pharmacists as part of routine care and CMH were compared, and erroneous documentation was classified according to previous definitions in the literature. Erroneous documentation was risk stratified.

Results

99 BPMH and CMH were compared. There were 14 medication omissions which occurred across 10 patients and 14 discrepancies across 12 patients. There was no association identified between erroneous documentation and pharmacist seniority/experience (p=0.25), where BPMH taken (p=0.7), day of week BPMH documented (p=0.45) or time since admission to when BPMH was documented (p=1). Patient age did not impact erroneous documentation rates (p=0.22). There was an association between the number of sources used to confirm a medication history and erroneous documentation incidence (p=0.035). The number of medications increased the rate of documentation error. While 85.19% (n=115) of erroneous documentation were deemed unlikely to cause patient discomfort or clinical deterioration, 1.48% (n=2) had the potential to result in severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.

Conclusion

Six out of seven BPMH documented by pharmacists as part of usual clinical practice are accurate. Major influences on accuracy include the number of medications and sources used. There is a low possibility that erroneous documentation by pharmacists will cause harm.

The utility of the records medical: factors associated with the medication errors in chronic disease

OBJECTIVE

This study describes the development of the medication history of the medical records to measure factors associated with medication errors among chronic diseases patients in Diamantina, Minas Gerais.

METHODS

retrospective, descriptive observational study of secondary data, through the review of medical records of hypertensive and diabetic patients, from March to October 2016.

RESULTS

The patients the mean age of patient was 62.1 ± 14.3 years. The number of basic nursing care (95.5%) prevailed and physician consultations were 82.6%. Polypharmacy was recorded in 54% of sample, and review of the medication lists by a pharmacist revealed that 67.0% drug included at least one risk. The most common risks were: drug-drug interaction (57.8%), renal risk (29.8%), risk of falling (12.9%) and duplicate therapies (11.9%). Factors associated with medications errors history were chronic diseases and polypharmacy, that persisted in multivariate analysis, with adjusted RP chronic diseases, diabetes RP 1.55 (95%IC 1.04-1.94), diabetes/hypertension RP 1.6 (95%CI 1.09-1.23) and polypharmacy RP 1.61 (95%IC 1.41-1.85), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Medication errors are known to compromise patient safety. This has led to the suggestion that medication reconciliation an entry point into the systems health, ongoing care coordination and a person focused approach for people and their families.

[Description of contributing factors in adverse events related to patient safety and their preventability]

Objetivo

Evaluar el grado en que los sucesos adversos (SA) ligados a la asistencia sanitaria alcanzan al paciente y su severidad. Analizar los factores contribuyentes a la aparición de SA, la relación con el daño provocado y el grado de evitabilidad.

Diseño

Estudio descriptivo retrospectivo.

Emplazamiento

Servicio de Atención Primaria de Porriño desde enero de 2014 a abril de 2016.

Participantes y/o contexto

Se incluyeron notificaciones de SA en el Sistema de Notificación y Aprendizaje para Seguridad del Paciente (SiNASP).

Método

Variables de medida: incidente adverso (IA) si no alcanzó al paciente o no produjo daño, evento adverso (EA) si llegó al paciente con daño. Grado de daño clasificado como mínimo, menor, moderado, crítico y catastrófico. Evitabilidad registrada como escasa evidencia de ser evitable, 50% evitable y sólida evidencia de ser evitable. Análisis de datos: porcentajes y test de chi-cuadrado para variables cualitativas; p < 0,05 con SPSS.15 Fuente de datos: SiNASP. Consideraciones éticas: autorizado por el Comité de Ética de Investigación (2016/344).

Resultados

Se registraron 166 SA (50,0% hombres, 46,4% mujeres; edad media: 60,80 años). El 62,7% alcanzaron al paciente. EA: 45,8% produjeron daño mínimo y 2,4%, daño crítico. Los profesionales fueron factor contribuyente en el 71,7% de los EA, encontrándose tendencia a la asociación entre deficiente comunicación y ausencia de protocolos con el daño producido. Grado de evitabilidad: 96,4%.

Conclusiones

La mayoría de los SA alcanzaron al paciente, estando relacionados con la medicación, pruebas diagnósticas y errores de laboratorio. El grado de daño se asoció con problemas de comunicación, ausencia o deficiencia de protocolos y escasa cultura en seguridad.

Discrepancies in drug histories at admission to gastrointestinal surgery, internal medicine and geriatric hospital wards in Central Norway: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To compare discrepancies in drug histories among patients acutely admitted to different hospital wards, classify the discrepancies according to their potential clinical impact and identify appropriate selection criteria for patients that should be subject to a detailed drug history at admission.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Two gastrointestinal surgery wards and one geriatric ward at St Olav's University Hospital in Trondheim and two general internal medicine wards at Ålesund Hospital in Ålesund, Norway.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients acutely admitted to these wards during a period of three months were asked to participate in the study. A total of 168 patients were included. For each patient, drug information available at admission was compared with information from drug lists obtained from the general practitioner and (if applicable) the home care services/the nursing home.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Number of patients with one or more discrepancies in their drug history. Type and clinical impact of the discrepancies found. Selection criteria for patients that should be subject to a detailed drug history.

RESULTS

In total, 83% had at least one discrepancy in their drug history. Omission of a drug accounted for 72% of the discrepancies, whereas a difference in dosing was the cause of the remaining 28%. 9% of the discrepancies had the potential to cause severe harm or discomfort. We found no significant differences in the number of discrepancies between hospital wards, genders, ages or levels of care.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the importance of collecting drug information from all available sources when a patient is admitted to hospital. As we found no significant differences in discrepancies between subgroups of patients, we suggest that medication reconciliation should be performed for all patients.

Consequence of delegating medication-related tasks from physician to clinical pharmacist in an acute admission unit: an analytical study

OBJECTIVES

Studies have shown that medication histories obtained by clinical pharmacists (CPs) are more complete, and that medication reviews by CPs reduce healthcare costs, drug-related readmissions and emergency readmissions. The aim of this study was to identify the consequences of delegating medication-related tasks from physicians to CPs.

METHODS

An analytical study based on data from a prospective cluster randomised trial was performed. The intervention consisted of CPs obtaining medication history, performing medication reconciliation and medication review. The physician had to approve the prescriptions and assess changes proposed by the CP. The primary outcome measure was a comparison of changes in the Electronic Medication Module (EMM) and changes proposed by CPs.

RESULTS

232 and 216 patients were included on control days (n=63) and intervention days (n=63). In total, 1018 changes were made in the control group (by physicians). In the intervention group 2123 changes were made, 1808 by CPs and 315 by physicians. In particular, the number of substitutions, registration of drugs and change of instructions for use (eg, administration times) differed between physicians and pharmacists. CPs made 341 written proposals in the intervention group and, of these, 22.9% (95% CI 18.7% to 27.8%) and 50.9% (95% CI 45.5% to 56.2%) were accepted by a physician at discharge from the acute admission unit (AAU) and hospital, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

CPs updated the EMM more thoroughly than physicians, especially entering new prescriptions, substitutions and changing instructions for use. Half of the written proposals were accepted. The extent to which patients benefit from a CP intervention is unknown.

Trained student pharmacists' telephonic collection of patient medication information: Evaluation of a structured interview tool

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility and fidelity of student pharmacists collecting patient medication list information using a structured interview tool and the accuracy of documenting the information. The medication lists were used by a community pharmacist to provide a targeted medication therapy management (MTM) intervention.

DESIGN

Descriptive analysis of patient medication lists collected with telephone interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Ten trained student pharmacists collected the medication lists.

INTERVENTION

Trained student pharmacists conducted audio-recorded telephone interviews with 80 English-speaking, community-dwelling older adults using a structured interview tool to collect and document medication lists.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility was measured using the number of completed interviews, the time student pharmacists took to collect the information, and pharmacist feedback. Fidelity to the interview tool was measured by assessing student pharmacists' adherence to asking all scripted questions and probes. Accuracy was measured by comparing the audio-recorded interviews to the medication list information documented in an electronic medical record.

RESULTS

On average, it took student pharmacists 26.7 minutes to collect the medication lists. The community pharmacist said the medication lists were complete and that having the medication lists saved time and allowed him to focus on assessment, recommendations, and education during the targeted MTM session. Fidelity was high, with an overall proportion of asked scripted probes of 83.75% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.62-86.88%). Accuracy was also high for both prescription (95.1%; 95% CI, 94.3-95.8%) and nonprescription (90.5%; 95% CI, 89.4-91.4%) medications.

CONCLUSION

Trained student pharmacists were able to use an interview tool to collect and document medication lists with a high degree of fidelity and accuracy. This study suggests that student pharmacists or trained technicians may be able to collect patient medication lists to facilitate MTM sessions in the community pharmacy setting. Evaluating the sustainability of using student pharmacists or trained technicians to collect medication lists is needed.

Medication reconciliation errors in a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia: admission discrepancies and risk factors

Background:

Medication reconciliation is a major component of safe patient care. One of the main problems in the implementation of a medication reconciliation process is the lack of human resources. With limited resources, it is better to target medication reconciliation resources to patients who will derive the most benefit from it.

Objective:

The primary objective of this study was to determine the frequency and types of medication reconciliation errors identified by pharmacists performing medication reconciliation at admission. Each medication error was rated for its potential to cause patient harm during hospitalization. A secondary objective was to determine risk factors associated with medication reconciliation errors.

Methods:

This was a prospective, single-center pilot study conducted in the internal medicine and surgical wards of a tertiary care teaching hospital in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia. A clinical pharmacist took the best possible medication history of patients admitted to medical and surgical services and compared with the medication orders at hospital admission; any identified discrepancies were noted and analyzed for reconciliation errors. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the risk factors related to reconciliation errors.

Results:

A total of 328 patients (138 in surgical and 198 in medical) were included in the study. For the 1419 medications recorded, 1091 discrepancies were discovered out of which 491 (41.6%) were reconciliation errors. The errors affected 177 patients (54%). The incidence of reconciliation errors in the medical patient group was 25.1% and 32.0% in the surgical group (p<0.001). In both groups, the most frequent reconciliation error was the omission (43.5% and 51.2%). Lipid-lowering (12.4%) and antihypertensive agents were most commonly involved. If undetected, 43.6% of order errors were rated as potentially requiring increased monitoring or intervention to preclude harm; 17.7% were rated as potentially harmful. A multivariate logistic regression model showed that patients aged ≥65 years, polypharmacy, and prescriptions for hypoglycemic drugs and warfarin were more likely associated with reconciliation errors.

Conclusion:

There is a high failure rate in medication reconciliation process in patients admitted to the medical and surgical department. The reconciliation process proves to be a useful tool since nearly half of avoided reconciliation errors were unintentional and had the potential for harm. This strategy, based on our results and the difficulty of applying the process to all patients should be directed primarily to the patients at increased risk of error.

Medication reconciliation as a medication safety initiative in Ethiopia: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Medication related adverse events are common, particularly during transitions of care, and have a significant impact on patient outcomes and healthcare costs. Medication reconciliation (MedRec) is an important initiative to achieve the Quality Use of Medicines, and has been adopted as a standard practice in many developed countries. However, the impact of this strategy is rarely described in Ethiopia. The aims of this study are to explore patient safety culture, and to develop, implement and evaluate a theory informed MedRec intervention, with the aim of minimising the incidence of medication errors during hospital admission.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

The study will be conducted in a resource limited setting. There are three phases to this project. The first phase is a mixed methods study of healthcare professionals' perspectives of patient safety culture and patients' experiences of medication related adverse events. In this phase, the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture will be used along with semi-structured indepth interviews to investigate patient safety culture and experiences of medication related adverse events. The second phase will use a semi-structured interview guide, designed according to the 12 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework, to explore the barriers and facilitators to medication safety activities delivered by hospital pharmacists. The third phase will be a single centre, before and after study, that will evaluate the impact of pharmacist conducted admission MedRec in an emergency department (ED). The main outcome measure is the incidence and potential clinical severity of medication errors. We will then analyse the differences in the incidence and severity of medication errors before and after initiation of an ED pharmacy service.

Impact of clinical pharmacist intervention on length of stay in an acute admission unit: a cluster randomised study

Objectives

Physicians in acute admission units (AAUs) are obliged to obtain medication history and perform medication reconciliation, which is time consuming and often incomplete. Studies show that clinical pharmacists (CPs) can obtain accurate medication histories, but so far no studies have investigated the effect of this on time measures. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to investigate the effect of a CP intervention on length of stay (LOS) in an AAU.

Methods

The study was designed as a prospective, cluster randomised study. Weekdays were randomised to control or intervention. CP intervention consisted of obtaining medication history and performing medication reconciliation and review. The primary outcome was LOS in the AAU. Secondary outcomes were other time-related measures-for example, physicians' self-reported time spent on medication topics. Finally, the number of documented medications per patient was established.

Results

232 and 216 patients, respectively, were included on control (n=63) and intervention (n=63) days. The mean LOS was 342 (95% CI 323 to 362) min in the intervention group and 339 (95% CI 322 to 357) min in the control group, which was not statistically significantly different. Physicians spent on average 4.3 (95% CI 3.7 to 5.0) min in the intervention group and 7.5 (95% CI 6.6 to 8.5) min in the control group, corresponding to an overall reduction of 43.0% (95% CI 30.9% to 53.0%, p<0.001). The number of documented medications per patient was 10.0 (intervention group) and 8.8 (control group).

Conclusions

This study indicates that LOS in the AAU was not affected by CP intervention; however, physicians reported a significant reduction in time spent on medication topics.

Trial registration number

Clinical Trial Gov: 1-16-02-379-13.

Effectiveness of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation programmes on clinical outcomes at hospital transitions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Pharmacists play a role in providing medication reconciliation. However, data on effectiveness on patients' clinical outcomes appear inconclusive. Thus, the aim of this study was to systematically investigate the effect of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation programmes on clinical outcomes at hospital transitions.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, IPA, CINHAL and PsycINFO from inception to December 2014. Included studies were all published studies in English that compared the effectiveness of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation interventions to usual care, aimed at improving medication reconciliation programmes. Meta-analysis was carried out using a random effects model, and subgroup analysis was conducted to determine the sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

17 studies involving 21,342 adult patients were included. Eight studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Most studies targeted multiple transitions and compared comprehensive medication reconciliation programmes including telephone follow-up/home visit, patient counselling or both, during the first 30 days of follow-up. The pooled relative risks showed a more substantial reduction of 67%, 28% and 19% in adverse drug event-related hospital revisits (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.53), emergency department (ED) visits (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.57 to 0.92) and hospital readmissions (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.95) in the intervention group than in the usual care group, respectively. The pooled data on mortality (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.16) and composite readmission and/or ED visit (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.00) did not differ among the groups. There was significant heterogeneity in the results related to readmissions and ED visits, however. Subgroup analyses based on study design and outcome timing did not show statistically significant results.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacist-led medication reconciliation programmes are effective at improving post-hospital healthcare utilisation. This review supports the implementation of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation programmes that include some component aimed at improving medication safety.

Mentoring and supervising clinical pharmacist students at patients' bedside: which benefits?

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

 Hospital clinical pharmacists are involved in teaching students during professional internship. Organization between the unit care and the pharmacy place is complicated. This study evaluated the effectiveness of two pharmaceutical teams: an experienced pharmacist in the pharmacy place, reachable by phone (team 1) or an experienced pharmacist in the ward, near patients and students (team 2).

METHODS

Pharmaceutical interventions were collected during two successive time periods, each of 6 months in a 15-bed unit (neurology). During the first time period, prescriptions were analyzed by the student (resident) in the ward and experienced pharmacist in the pharmacy place. During the second time period, prescriptions were analyzed by both experienced pharmacist and the resident in the ward. We compared the number, the type, the approval of pharmaceutical interventions and the medication reconciliation activities. Proportions were compared by a chisquared test (or Fisher exact test) as well as the quantitative value was calculated by a Student test.

RESULTS

'Mentoring and supervising' students in the ward increased significantly the number of pharmaceutical interventions (PI; 104 interventions for 1408 analyzed prescriptions (7.4%) by the students in the ward and 317 interventions for 1391 (22.8%) by both the experienced pharmacist and the students in the ward (P = 0.002). Furthermore, specific interventions from medication reconciliation were significantly increased by the presence of experienced pharmacist in the ward (0.96% vs. 8.83% P = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Effectiveness of clinical pharmacists can be improved by the presence of experienced pharmacist at patients' bedside, near students.

Application of the structured history taking of medication use tool to optimise prescribing for older patients and reduce adverse events

BACKGROUND

Older patients, due to polypharmacy, co-morbidities and often multiple prescribing doctors are particularly susceptible to medication history errors, leading to adverse drug events, patient harm and increased costs. Medication reconciliation at the point of admission to hospital can reduce medication discrepancies and adverse events. The Structured HIstory taking of Medication use (SHiM) tool was developed to provide a structure to the medication reconciliation process. There has been very little research with regards to SHiM, it's application to older patients and it's potential to reduce adverse events.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether application of SHiM could optimise older patients' prescriptions on admission to hospital, and in-turn reduce adverse events, compared to standard care.

SETTING

A sub-study of a large clinical trial involving hospital inpatients over the age of 65 in five hospitals across Europe.

METHOD

A modified version of SHiM was used to obtain accurate drug histories for patients after the attending physician had obtained a medication list via standard methods. Discrepancies between the two lists were recorded and classified, and the clinical relevance of the discrepancies was determined. Whether discrepancies in patients' medication histories, as revealed by SHiM, resulted in actual clinical consequences was then investigated. As this study was carried out during the observation phase of the clinical trial, results were not communicated to the medical teams.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Discrepancies between medication lists and whether these resulted in clinical consequences.

RESULTS

SHiM was applied to 123 patients. The mean age of the participants was 78 (±6). 200 discrepancies were identified. 90 patients (73 %) had at least one discrepancy with a median of 1.0 discrepancies per patient (IQR 0.00-2.25). 53 (26.5 %) were classified as 'unlikely to cause patient discomfort or clinical deterioration', 145 (72.5 %) as 'having potential to cause moderate discomfort or clinical deterioration', and 2 (1 %) as 'having potential to cause severe discomfort or clinical deterioration'. Of the 200 discrepancies identified, 2(1 %) resulted in adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest SHiM is an effective medications reconciliation tool and does identify discrepancies with potential for patient harm. However, it's the capacity to prevent actual adverse events is less convincing.

Medication reconciliation of patients with hip fracture by clinical pharmacists

Objective

Medication reconciliation is a strategy for reducing medication discrepancies and improving patient safety. Transitions through different levels of care contribute to medication discrepancies caused by lack of communication. In October 2011, St Olav's Hospital initiated a fast-track model for patients with hip fractures, where clinical pharmacists (CPs) are a part of a multidisciplinary team. The purpose of this study was to examine discrepancies discovered in medication lists by CPs at the orthopaedic ward and consider their clinical relevance.

Method

This prospective study was conducted at an orthopaedic ward at St Olav's Hospital in the period October 2011-August 2012. Medication reconciliation by CPs was done for all patients with a hip fracture using a systematic method. Information was obtained by the CP by interview with the patient and additional sources, for example, medication list from general practitioner and nursing home. An independent expert group consisting of a geriatrician, an orthopaedist and a CP considered level of clinical relevance of the discrepancies found in the collected data.

Results

A total of 410 discrepancies were registered for all 317 patients, Discrepancies were found in 159 (50%) patients with an average of 2.6 per patient affected. Of the total amount of discrepancies, the expert group evaluated 68% and 19% as potentially moderate and severe, respectively, if they were unattended during hospitalisation and after discharge.

Conclusions

By using CPs in medication reconciliation at orthopaedic wards, discrepancies that can lead to serious discomfort or clinical deterioration of patients can be avoided.

Medication histories by pharmacy technicians and physicians in an emergency department

BACKGROUND

Medication histories (MHs) obtained at the time of patients' admission to hospital are often incomplete, and lack of information about patients' actual medicine use can potentially lead to prescribing failures and serious adverse events. Uses of clinical pharmacists in obtaining MHs are beneficial, but due to limited economic resources clinical pharmacists cannot be present in every hospital ward, and therefore pharmacy technicians (PTs) could probably be trained in obtaining MHs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare discrepancies in MHs obtained by physicians and PTs in an emergency department. Second to evaluate, whether PTs could assist and/or replace physicians in obtaining MHs.

METHODS

The study was conducted in the emergency department at Svendborg Hospital, Denmark and patients treated with a minimum of three prescribed medicines were included. On patients' admission to hospital, physicians recorded the primary MHs, and within 48 h the secondary MHs were made by PTs. All MHs were conducted using standard guidelines. A clinical pharmacist reviewed the MHs, and based on these reviews, a final medication list was defined, and the MHs were compared to this. The discrepancies were registered with respect to type and therapeutic group (medicines).

RESULTS

A total of 113 patients were included in this study, and data for 106 patients were analysed. On average, three discrepancies were detected for each patient in the primary MHs, and less than one discrepancy per patient in the secondary MHs. A total of 1075 prescriptions were registered, and for the physicians, 287 discrepancies (27 % of total prescriptions) were found, and for PTs the number was 28 (2 % of total prescriptions). The commonly detected discrepancy was "drug missing in the electronic patient record". The largest number of discrepancies was found for nervous system medications (ATC group N), medicines from ATC group A (alimentary tract and metabolism) and respiratory medicine (ATC group R).

CONCLUSION

Fewer discrepancies in the MHs obtained by PTs than physicians were detected compared to standard medicine lists made by an experienced clinical pharmacist.

[Reliability of Primary Care computerised medication records]

OBJECTIVE

To quantify and to evaluate the reliability of Primary Care (PC) computerised medication records of as an information source of patient chronic medications, and to identify associated factors with the presence of discrepancies.

DESIGN

A descriptive cross-sectional study.

LOCATION

General Referral Hospital in Murcia.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients admitted to the cardiology-chest diseases unit, during the months of February to April 2013, on home treatment, who agreed to participate in the study.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

Evaluation of the reliability of Primary Care computerised medication records by analysing the concordance, by identifying discrepancies, between the active medication in these records and that recorded in pharmacist interview with the patient/caregiver. Identification of associated factors with the presence of discrepancies was analysed using a multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 308 patients with a mean of 70.9 years (13.0 SD). The concordance of active ingredients was 83.7%, and this decreased to 34.7% when taking the dosage into account. Discrepancies were found in 97.1% of patients. The most frequent discrepancy was omission of frequency (35.6%), commission (drug added unjustifiably) (14.6%), and drug omission (12.7%). Age older than 65 years (1.98 [1.08 to 3.64]), multiple chronic diseases (1.89 [1.04 to 3.42]), and have a narcotic or psychotropic drug prescribed (2.22 [1.16 to 4.24]), were the factors associated with the presence of discrepancies.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary Care computerised medication records, although of undoubted interest, are not be reliable enough to be used as the sole source of information on patient chronic medications when admitted to hospital.

Medication Reconciliation Practices in Canadian Emergency Departments: A National Survey

BACKGROUND

As of 2015, Accreditation Canada's Qmentum program expects emergency departments (EDs) to initiate medication reconciliation for 2 groups of patients: (1) those with a decision to admit and (2) those without a decision to admit who meet the criteria of a risk-based, health care organization-defined selection process. Pharmacist-led best possible medication histories (BPMHs) obtained in the ED are considered more complete and accurate than BPMHs obtained by other ED providers, with pharmacy technicians obtaining BPMHs as effectively as do pharmacists. A current assessment of the role of pharmacy in BPMH processes in Canadian EDs is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and describe BPMH and medication reconciliation practices in Canadian EDs, including those performed by members of the ED pharmacy team.

METHODS

All Canadian hospitals with an ED and at least 50 acute care beds were contacted to identify the presence of dedicated ED pharmacy services (defined as at least a 0.5 full-time equivalent position). Different electronic surveys were then distributed to ED pharmacy team members (where available) and ED managers (all hospitals).

RESULTS

Survey responses were obtained from 60 (63%) of 95 ED pharmacy teams and 128 (53%) of 243 ED managers. Only 38 (30%) of the 128 ED managers believed that their current BPMH processes were adequate to obtain a BPMH for all admissions. Fifty-nine (98%) of the ED pharmacy personnel reported obtaining BPMHs (most commonly 6-10 per day), with priority given to admitted patients. Only 14 (23%) of the 60 ED pharmacy teams reported that their EDs had adequate staffing to comply with Accreditation Canada's requirements for obtaining BPMHs. This result is supported by the 104 (81%) out of 128 ED managers who reported that additional ED staffing would be needed to comply with the requirements. Numerous ED managers identified the need to expand ED pharmacy services and improve information technology support.

CONCLUSIONS

BPMH processes in Canadian EDs were variable and inadequately supported. Survey responses suggested that additional staff and significant improvements in structured processes would be required to meet Accreditation Canada standards.

Feasibility of the implementation of medication reconciliation in Hungary

Introduction: For medication safety improvement medication reconciliation was proven to be an effective method transferable between different healthcare providers and ward profiles. Aim: Gaining a better understanding of the process of reconciling medicines. Mapping the driving and restraining forces of introducing medication reconciliation. Method: A search of the literature was conducted. 19 databases were searched using 7 different search engines. The relevance of the papers was rated by two independent experts. Data were extracted based on a previously compiled extraction tool. Results: 230 articles were evaluated. Limits and driving forces of implementing medication reconciliation were set out. Often mentioned implementation obstacles were: communication issues, disengagement of the leaders, unpredictable resources and competence problems. Recommendations mainly consisted of process redesign techniques, presentation of cost-effectiveness data and arranging special training for staff. Conclusions: For improvement of medication safety in Hungarian hospitals implementing medication reconciliation should be considered. The conclusion of ongoing on-site trials as well as limits and success factors identified in this paper should taken into account. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(35), 1395–1405.

Estimating the information gap between emergency department records of community medication compared to on-line access to the community-based pharmacy records

Objective

Errors in community medication histories increase the risk of adverse events. The objectives of this study were to estimate the extent to which access to community-based pharmacy records provided more information about prescription drug use than conventional medication histories.

Materials and methods

A prospective cohort of patients with public drug insurance who visited the emergency departments (ED) in two teaching hospitals in Montreal, Quebec was recruited. Drug lists recorded in the patients’ ED charts were compared with pharmacy records of dispensed medications retrieved from the public drug insurer. Patient and drug-related predictors of discrepancies were estimated using general estimating equation multivariate logistic regression.

Results

613 patients participated in the study (mean age 63.1 years, 59.2% women). Pharmacy records identified 41.5% more prescribed medications than were noted in the ED chart. Concordance was highest for anticoagulants, cardiovascular drugs and diuretics. Omissions in the ED chart were more common for drugs that may be taken episodically. Patients with more than 12 medications (OR 2.92, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.97) and more than one pharmacy (OR 3.85, 95% CI 1.80 to 6.59) were more likely to have omissions in the ED chart.

Discussion

The development of health information exchanges could improve the efficiency and accuracy of information about community medication histories if they enable automated access to dispensed medication records from community pharmacies, particularly for the most vulnerable populations with multiple morbidities.

Conclusions

Pharmacy records identified a substantial number of medications that were not in the ED chart. There is potential for greater safety and efficiency with automated access to pharmacy records.

Medication reconciliation service in Tan Tock Seng Hospital

PURPOSE

Medication reconciliation is integral to every hospital. Approximately 60 percent of all hospital medication errors occur at admission, intra-hospital transfer or discharge. Effectively and consistently performing medication reconciliation at care-interfaces continues to be a challenge. Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH) averages 4,700 admissions monthly. Many patients are elderly (> 65 years old) at risk from poly-pharmacy. As part of a medication safety initiative, pharmacy staff started a medication reconciliation service in 2007, which expanded to include all patients in October 2009. This article aims to describe the TTSH medication reconciliation system and to highlight common medication errors occurring following incomplete medication reconciliation.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

Where possible, patients admitted into TTSH are seen by pharmacy staff within 24 hours of admission. A form was created to document their medications, which is filed into the case sheets for referencing purposes. Any discrepancies in medicines are brought to doctors' attention. Patients are also counseled about changes to their medications. Errors picked up were captured in an Excel database.

FINDINGS

The most common medication error was prescribers missing out medications. The second commonest was recording different doses and regimens. The reason was mainly due to doctors transcribing medications inaccurately.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS

This is a descriptive study and no statistical tests were carried out. Data entry was done by different pharmacy staff, and not a dedicated person; hence, data might be under-reported.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The findings demonstrate the importance of medication reconciliation on admission. Accurate medication reconciliation can help to reduce transcription errors and improve service quality.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

The article highlights medication reconciliation's importance and has implications for healthcare professionals in all countries.

[Medication reconciliation on hospital admission in patients with multiple chronic diseases using a standardised methodology]

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence of medication errors when admitting patients with multiple chronic conditions to hospital, using a standard method.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A prospective, observational study was conducted on patients with multiple chronic conditions admitted to a tertiary hospital. The medication reconciliation was performed using the standard method considered the most suitable for these patients by an expert panel, following the Delphi methodology. The main information source used for this was the computerised clinical notes, both in primary care and in the hospital, recurring to a clinical interview if necessary. Discrepancies justified by the clinician, as well as reconciliation errors were recorded. The type of error and the pharmacological group involved were analysed and the seriousness of each one of them was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients were included, with reconciliation errors being found in 75.4% of cases. The patients had 1397 prescribed drugs, of which 234 had discrepancies that required clarification by the clinician responsible. The clinician modified the prescription in 184 of these discrepancies, which were considered reconciliation errors. The types of error were: medication omission (139), commission (9), dose, prescription or different routes (24) and by incomplete prescription (12). Anti-anaemic drugs, vitamins, and psychoanaleptics were among the pharmacotherapeutic groups most affected by the errors.

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of patients with multiple chronic conditions with errors is elevated. The development of methods particularly directed at patients with multiple chronic conditions manages to detect and decrease a high percentage of medication errors associated with changes of care levels.

Emergency department medication history taking: current inefficiency and potential for a self-administered form

BACKGROUND

Emergency Departments (EDs) struggle with obtaining accurate medication information from patients.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to estimate the proportion of urban ED patients who are able to complete a self-administered medication form and record patient observations of the medication information process.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we consecutively sampled ED patients during various shifts between 8 AM and 10 PM. We created a one-page medication questionnaire that included a list of 49 common medications, categorized by general indications. We asked patients to circle any medications they took and write the names of those not on the form in a dedicated area on the bottom of the page. After their visit, we asked patients to recall which providers had asked them about their medications.

RESULTS

Research staff approached 354 patients; median age was 45 years (interquartile range 29-53 years). Two hundred and forty-nine (70%) completed a form, 61 (17%) were too ill, 19 (5%) could not read it, and 25 (7%) refused to participate. Excluding refusals, 249 of 329 (76%; 95% confidence interval 70-80%) were able to complete the form. Of 209 patients recalling their visit, 180 (86%) indicated that multiple providers took a history, including 103 in which every provider did so, and 9 (4%) indicated that no provider took a medication history.

CONCLUSIONS

The process of ED medication information transfer often involves redundant efforts by the health care team. More than 70% of patients presenting for Emergency care were able to complete a self-administered medication information form.

Medication reconciliation: passing phase or real need?

Medication reconciliation errors occur across transitions in patient care. Of all medication errors in a hospital, 25 % in hospitalised patients are caused by a failure to reconcile new prescriptions with ongoing home treatments. These errors are more common at discharge, but the critical moment for detecting and resolving them is at the time of admission. This commentary reviews the different ways in which reconciliation errors can be prevented. The reconciliation process should be standardised and implemented in daily practice as a routine part of healthcare provision. To achieve this, professional development of hospital pharmacists is of paramount importance. The commentary goes on to describe the factors that affect the reconciliation process and the stages involved in its implementation. Finally, we discuss the use of information technology as a means to help integrating medication reconciliation into clinical practice.

Clinical pharmacist's contribution to medication reconciliation on admission to hospital in Ireland

BACKGROUND

Medication reconciliation has been mandated by the Irish government at transfer of care. Research is needed to determine the contribution of clinical pharmacists to the process.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the contribution of emergency department based clinical pharmacists to admission medication reconciliation in Ireland.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Frequency of clinical pharmacist's activities.

SETTING

Two public university teaching hospitals.

METHODOLOGY

Adults admitted via the accident and emergency department, from a non-acute setting, reporting the use of at least three regular prescription medications, were eligible for inclusion. Medication reconciliation was provided by clinical pharmacists to randomly-selected patients within 24-hours of admission. This process includes collecting a gold-standard pre-admission medication list, checking this against the admission prescription and communicating any changes. A discrepancy was defined as any difference between the gold-standard pre-admission medication list and the admission prescription. Discrepancies were communicated to the clinician in the patient's healthcare record. Potentially harmful discrepancies were also communicated verbally. Pharmacist activities and unintentional discrepancies, both resolved and unresolved at 48-hours were measured. Unresolved discrepancies were confirmed verbally by the team as intentional or unintentional. A reliable and validated tool was used to assess clinical significance by medical consultants, clinical pharmacists, community pharmacists and general practitioners.

RESULTS

In total, 134 patients, involving 1,556 medications, were included in the survey. Over 97 % of patients (involving 59 % of medications) experienced a medication change on admission. Over 90 % of patients (involving 29 % of medications) warranted clinical pharmacy input to determine whether such changes were intentional or unintentional. There were 447 interventions by the clinical pharmacist regarding apparently unintentional discrepancies, a mean of 3.3 per patient. In total, 227 (50 %) interventions were accepted and discrepancies resolved. At 48-hours under half (46 %) of patients remained affected by an unintentional unresolved discrepancy (60 % related to omissions). Verbally communicated discrepancies were more likely to be resolved than those not communicated verbally (Chi-square (1) = 30.029 p < 0.05). Under half of unintentional unresolved discrepancies (46 %) had the potential to cause minor harm compared to 70 % of the resolved unintentional discrepancies. None had the potential to result in severe harm.

CONCLUSION

Clinical pharmacists contribute positively to admission medication reconciliation and should be engaged to deliver this service in Ireland.

Errors in medication history at hospital admission: prevalence and predicting factors

Background

An accurate medication list at hospital admission is essential for the evaluation and further treatment of patients. The objective of this study was to describe the frequency, type and predictors of errors in medication history, and to evaluate the extent to which standard care corrects these errors.

Methods

A descriptive study was carried out in two medical wards in a Swedish hospital using Lund Integrated Medicines Management (LIMM)-based medication reconciliation. A clinical pharmacist identified each patient's most accurate pre-admission medication list by conducting a medication reconciliation process shortly after admission. This list was then compared with the patient's medication list in the hospital medical records. Addition or withdrawal of a drug or changes to the dose or dosage form in the hospital medication list were considered medication discrepancies. Medication discrepancies for which no clinical reason could be identified (unintentional changes) were considered medication history errors.

Results

The final study population comprised 670 of 818 eligible patients. At least one medication history error was identified by pharmacists conducting medication reconciliations for 313 of these patients (47%; 95% CI 43-51%). The most common medication error was an omitted drug, followed by a wrong dose. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that a higher number of drugs at admission (odds ratio [OR] per 1 drug increase = 1.10; 95% CI 1.06-1.14; p < 0.0001) and the patient living in their own home without any care services (OR = 1.58; 95% CI 1.02-2.45; p = 0.042) were predictors for medication history errors at admission. The results further indicated that standard care by non-pharmacist ward staff had partly corrected the errors in affected patients by four days after admission, but a considerable proportion of the errors made in the initial medication history at admission remained undetected by standard care (OR for medication errors detected by pharmacists' medication reconciliation carried out on days 4-11 compared to days 0-1 = 0.52; 95% CI 0.30-0.91; p=0.021).

Conclusions

Clinical pharmacists conducting LIMM-based medication reconciliations have a high potential for correcting errors in medication history for all patients. In an older Swedish population, those prescribed many drugs seem to benefit most from admission medication reconciliation.

Medicines Reconciliation on Admission to Inpatient Psychiatric Care: Findings from a UK Quality Improvement Programme

OBJECTIVE

Medication errors are a common cause of avoidable morbidity, and transfer between clinical settings is a known risk factor for such errors. Medicines reconciliation means there is no unintended discrepancy between the medication prescribed for a patient prior to admission and on admission. Our aim was to improve the quality of practice supporting medicines reconciliation at the point of admission to a psychiatric ward.

METHODS

An audit-based quality improvement programme (QIP), using the proxy measure for medicines reconciliation of two or more sources of information being consulted about current medicines, and compared.

RESULTS

At baseline audit, 42 Trusts submitted data for 1790 patients. At re-audit 16 months later, 43 Trusts submitted data for 2296 patients. While doctors were most commonly identified in Trust policies as having overall responsibility for medicines reconciliation, the task was most often undertaken by pharmacy staff, with most activity occurring within 24 h of admission. The proportion of patients in whom medicines reconciliation was possible was 71% at baseline and 79% at re-audit. In such patients, discrepancies were identified in 25% at baseline and 31% at re-audit; a small proportion of these discrepancies were clearly clinically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

This QIP achieved modest improvement in medicines reconciliation practice.

A simple tool to improve medication reconciliation at the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Medication histories acquired upon admission are often incomplete. Using a standardized approach warrants more complete medication reconciliation, however, this is too time consuming to be performed. Other strategies guaranteeing complete medication histories should be explored. We developed a limited list of standardized questions and assessed its impact on completeness of medication histories.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled adults presenting to a tertiary care emergency department. In the control group, medication histories were conducted by physicians of general internal medicine conform standard care. In the intervention group, the physicians were obliged to use, besides the standard care, the 'limited questions list' for medication history acquisition. The clinical pharmacist re-obtained medication histories of the patients in both groups using a standardized approach. The primary outcome was the impact of the use of a 'limited questions list' on the frequency of drug omissions in medication histories.

RESULTS

260 consecutive patients were enrolled: 130 in the intervention group and 130 in the control group. There was a significant reduction of 49.3% in drug omissions in the intervention group. The omission rate per medication history was 1.1 for the control group, which was significantly lower (0.6) in the intervention group. Antithrombotics were most frequently forgotten in the control care group as opposed to dietary supplements in the intervention group.

CONCLUSION

Drug omission rate in medication histories can be significantly reduced if a limited list of simple questions is used during anamnesis. Widespread use of this tool should be considered to be implemented.