Quality of medication use in primary care--mapping the problem, working to a solution: a systematic review of the literature

Relevance of therapeutic prescription modifications in Dutch community pharmacies

OBJECTIVES

Community pharmacists modify prescriptions to solve or prevent drug-related problems. To assess the relevance of prescription modifications, they are usually judged on clinical outcomes only, overlooking their humanistic and economic impact. This study aims to evaluate therapeutic prescription modifications performed by Dutch community pharmacists in terms of clinical outcome, along with the humanistic aspect "usability" and economic aspect "efficiency."

METHODS

A multidisciplinary panel evaluated the relevance of 160 cases of therapeutic prescription modifications collected in community pharmacies. Cases were stratified for type of drug-related problem based on their frequency in the original set of modifications. Both the relevance in general and the impact on the individual aspects of effectiveness and medication safety, usability, and efficiency were evaluated.

KEY FINDINGS

Sixteen cases (10.0%) were excluded because of insufficient information for evaluation. Sixty percent of the 144 cases were evaluated as relevant (56.3% relevant and 4.2% highly relevant). The remaining cases (31.9%) were moderately relevant. For 7.6% of the cases, evaluations were inconclusive. In 25.0% of the cases, there was a major improvement on at least one of the aspects effectiveness, medication safety, usability, or efficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of therapeutic prescription modifications performed by Dutch community pharmacists were evaluated as relevant or highly relevant by a multidisciplinary panel. Modifications improved clinical, humanistic, and economic aspects. This shows the important role of community pharmacists in primary healthcare. Sharing more clinical information like indication, illness severity, and treatment plan will enable pharmacists to improve their contribution to safe medication use.

Time-Restricted Eating in Real-World Healthcare Settings: Utilisation and Short-Term Outcomes Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Time-restricted eating (TRE) shows promise for managing weight and metabolic issues, yet its application in real-world healthcare settings remains underexplored. This study aims to assess the real-world utilisation and short-term outcomes of TRE in clinical practice.

METHODS

This observational study used a retrospective chart review of 271 adults who attended a metabolic specialist clinic between 2019 and 2023. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify factors associated with TRE adoption, while paired sample t-tests evaluated changes in outcomes among those who received TRE advice.

RESULTS

Among the 271 patients, 76% were female, 90% Caucasian, and 94% overweight/obese. Of all patients, 47.2% received TRE advice, mainly using the 16:8 method, alongside additional dietary guidance for 60% of patients. Working status and baseline metabolic profiles were the only factors significantly associated with TRE adoption. Among those who followed TRE, 81% experienced modest but significant reductions in weight (-1.2 kg, p < 0.01), BMI (-0.4 kg/m2, p < 0.01), and waist circumference (-3.7 cm, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights TRE as a feasible and practical dietary strategy for improving metabolic health in healthcare settings. However, further research and improved data capture are needed to explore long-term adherence, potential adverse effects, and the effectiveness of TRE across diverse patient populations.

Prescribing deprescribing for polypharmacy in Aotearoa New Zealand; experiences of a medication review activity in final year medical students on a general practice module

Introduction This study explored the experiences of students and their supervisors undertaking a medication review activity during a 6-week general practice module in their final year of medical school at University of Otago, Wellington, Aotearoa New Zealand. Aim The study sought the self-reported value of the activity in learning about prescribing, reflecting on polypharmacy, deprescribing, and changes to future practice for both student and supervisor. Methods All students in the final year general practice module were invited to complete a survey over a 12-month period, as were their supervisors. An abductive thematic analysis of survey results was performed. Results Fifty-eight percent (48/87) of students and 30% (10/33) of supervisors completed surveys. Five themes were identified in the analysis of qualitative data: value of the medication review, complexities of medicines, importance of monitoring, value of resources, and supervisor reflections on value to the student. Student and supervisor responses reflected on prescribing practice beyond what medication to give when. All responses described benefit to patients and the majority expressed thoughts on how it would change their future prescribing. Discussion The medication review activity in the final year general practice module provides learning opportunities for both student and general practitioner supervisor. This activity emphasises the risks of polypharmacy and how to deprescribe. This study underlines the value of medication reviews as intraprofessional communication activities, allowing reflection beyond what medication to prescribe and for what condition. The results underline the importance of reflecting on practice and aids quality improvement benefit to patients.

Dispensing error rates in pharmacy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Dispensing errors can cause preventable patient harm such as adverse drug events, hospitalisation, or death. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature and quantify the global prevalence of dispensing errors across pharmacy settings.

METHODS

Electronic databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched between January 2010 and September 2023. Studies published in English, from all pharmacy settings, with data that could be used to calculate the prevalence of dispensing errors were included. Studies were excluded if they did not report true dispensing errors. Data including study characteristics and dispensing error characteristics were extracted. The quality of the studies was assessed using 10 criteria. Random-effects meta-analysis was employed to estimate pooled prevalences and heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic. Subgroup analyses were performed according to sample size, study design, setting, error identification method, location, and study quality.

PROSPERO

CRD42020197860.

RESULTS

Of the 4216 articles, 62 studies were included. Hospital was the most common pharmacy setting (n = 44, 71.0%) and 15 studies were based in the community. The type of denominator used to report dispensing errors varied between studies, such as dispensed items (n = 45, 72.6%), doses (n = 7, 11.3%), or patients (n = 5, 8.1%). The prevalence of dispensing errors ranged from 0 to 33.3% (n = 62 studies with 64 prevalence estimates). The pooled prevalence for dispensing errors across all studies was 1.6% (95% CI 1.2%-2.1%, I2 = 100%). A majority of studies were of moderate methodological quality (n = 36, 58.1%) and interrater reliability was applied in eight studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The worldwide prevalence of dispensing errors was 1.6% across community, hospital and other pharmacy settings. This varied depending on the type of denominator used, study design and how the error was identified. This review highlights the need for consistent definitions and standardised classifications of dispensing errors worldwide to reduce heterogeneity.

Prevalence, contributing factors, and interventions to reduce medication errors in outpatient and ambulatory settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are common events that compromise patient safety. Outpatient and ambulatory settings enhance access to healthcare which has been linked to favorable outcomes. While medication errors have been extensively researched in inpatient settings, there is dearth of literature from outpatient settings.

AIM

To synthesize the peer-reviewed literature on the prevalence, nature, contributory factors, and interventions to minimize medication errors in outpatient and ambulatory settings.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar which were searched from 2011 to November 2021. Quality assessment was conducted using the quality assessment checklist for prevalence studies tool. Data related to contributory factors were synthesized according to Reason's accident causation model.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles were included in the review. Medication errors were common in outpatient and ambulatory settings (23-92% of prescribed drugs). Prescribing errors were the most common type of errors reported (up to 91% of the prescribed drugs, high variations in the data), with dosing errors being most prevalent (up to 41% of the prescribed drugs). Latent conditions, largely due to inadequate knowledge, were common contributory factors followed by active failures. The seven studies that discussed interventions were of poor quality and none used a randomized design.

CONCLUSION

Medication errors (particularly prescribing errors and dosing errors) in outpatient settings are prevalent, although reported prevalence range is wide. Future research should be informed by behavioral theories and should use high quality designs. These interventions should encompass system-level strategies, multidisciplinary collaborations, effective integration of pharmacists, health information technology, and educational programs.

Actual drug-related harms in residential aged care facilities: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Older people in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) have a high risk of safety issues and concerns about the potential quality of care received. This narrative review investigates the types of actual drug-related harms, their prevalence, reporting of any standard definitions for these harms, and their identification methods.

AREAS COVERED

The authors conducted a systematic search on Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, and PubMed from March 2001 to March 2021. This narrative review included all types of studies targeting aged care residents aged 65 years and above with actual drug-related harms.

EXPERT OPINION

The prevalence of actual drug-related harms in residents ranged from 0.07% to 63.0%. Falls, drug-drug interactions, neuropsychiatric symptoms, anaphylaxis, urinary tract infection, hypoglycemia, hypokalaemia, and acute kidney injury are the most common drug-related harms in older residents. Psychotropic drugs are the most common drug class implicated in these harms. Evidence related to the association between individual psychotropic drugs and injury, or harm is also lacking. Due to the variation in study duration, reported prevalence, identification methods, and absence of a definition for actual drug-related harms in most studies, further research is mandated to understand the prevalence and clinical implications of drug-related harms in older residents.

Ambulatory Medication Safety in Primary Care: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To review the literature on medication safety in primary care in the electronic health record era.

METHODS

Included studies measured rates and outcomes of medication safety in patients whose prescriptions were written in primary care clinics with electronic prescribing. Four investigators independently reviewed titles and analyzed abstracts with dual-reviewer review for eligibility, characteristics, and risk of bias.

RESULTS

Of 1464 articles identified, 56 met the inclusion criteria. Forty-three studies were noninterventional and 13 included an intervention. The majority of the studies (30) used their own definition of error. The most common outcomes were potentially inappropriate prescribing/medications (PIPs), adverse drug events (ADEs), and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). Most of the studies only included high-risk subpopulations (39), usually older adults taking > 4 medications. The rate of PIPs varied widely (0.19% to 98.2%). The rate of ADEs was lower (0.47% to 14.7%). There was poor correlation of PIP and PPO with documented ADEs leading to physical harm.

CONCLUSIONS

This literature is limited by its inconsistent and highly variable outcomes. The majority of medication safety studies in primary care were in high-risk populations and measured potential harms rather than actual harms. Applying algorithms to primary care medication lists significantly overestimates rate of actual harms.

Exploration of prescribing error reporting across primary care: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To explore barriers and facilitators to prescribing error reporting across primary care.

DESIGN

Qualitative semi-structured face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted to explore facilitators and barriers to reporting prescribing errors. Data collection and thematic analysis were informed by the COM-B model of behaviour change. Framework analysis was used for coding and charting the data with the assistance of NVivo software (V.12). General and context specific influences on prescribing error reporting were mapped to constructs from the COM-B model (ie, capability, opportunity and motivation).

SETTING

Primary care organisations, including community pharmacy, general practice and community care from North East England.

PARTICIPANTS

We interviewed a maximal variation purposive sample of 25 participants, including prescribers, community pharmacists and key stakeholders with primary care or medicines safety roles at local, regional and national levels.

RESULTS

Our findings describe a range of factors that influence the capability, opportunity and motivation to report prescribing errors in primary care. Three key contextual factors are also highlighted that were found to underpin many of the behavioural influences on reporting in this setting: the nature of prescribing; heterogeneous priorities for error reporting across and within different primary care organisations; and the complex infrastructure of reporting and learning pathways across primary care. Findings suggest that there is a lack of consistency in how, when and by whom, prescribing errors are reported across primary care.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is needed to identify cross-organisational and interprofessional consensus on agreed reporting thresholds and how best to facilitate a more collaborative approach to reporting and learning, that is, sensitive to the needs and priorities of disparate organisations across primary care. Despite acknowledged challenges, there may be potential for an increased role of community pharmacy in prescribing error reporting to support future learning.

Diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia medication prescribing in Qatari primary care settings: a retrospective analysis of electronic medical records

Background

Globally, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are recognised as a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Medications and medicines optimisation play an important role in the management of modifiable physiological risk factors and NCDs. The importance of lifestyle interventions in prevention of modifiable risk factors is also well established. The aim of this paper was to describe the quantity of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), hypertension and dyslipidaemia prescribing in Qatari primary care settings. Its findings will provide necessary information to inform pharmaceutical policy and practice.

Methods

The study was undertaken in Qatar’s publicly funded primary health care centres. Data sources for this study comprised electronic medical records. The Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) drug classification system was used to classify the medications prescribed. The number and proportion of medications by age, sex, nationality and diagnosis (T2DM, hypertension and dyslipidaemia) were reported.

Results

A total 81,569 individuals were included (18–29 years 2.4%; 30–39 years 11.7%; 40–49 years 25.4%; 50–59 years 31.9% and ≥ 60 years 28.6%). 55.6% participants were male. On average 10.2 medications were prescribed per person and 2.3 medications were included in each prescription. T2DM medications were most prescribed (N = 361,87780,799; 43.2%) followed by hypertension (N = 303,086; 36.2%) and dyslipidaemia (N = 172,163; 20.5%). Of the total medications prescribed, 72% (N = 605,488) were prescribed in individuals aged 50 years and above. Men were prescribed 62% (N = 515,043) medications while women were prescribed 38% (N = 322,083) medications. Southern Asians (N = 330,338; 39%) were prescribed most medication followed by Qataris (N = 181,328; 22%) and Northern African (N = 145,577; 17%).

Conclusions

In Qatar’s primary care settings, average medications prescribed per patients were found to be higher compared to other populations. While medications were actively prescribed for the 3 conditions, the study found variations by medication type, age, gender and nationality. Rational guidelines for the utilisation of medications need to be established with the support of real-world evidence.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40545-021-00353-4.

A Qualitative Analysis of Outpatient Medication Use in Community Settings: Observed Safety Vulnerabilities and Recommendations for Improved Patient Safety

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to analyze diverse patients' experiences throughout the medication use process to inform the development of overarching interventions that support safe medication use in community settings.

METHODS

Using a qualitative observational approach, we conducted approximately 18 hours of direct observation of the medication use process across multiple settings for a sample of vulnerable, high-risk patients. Observers recorded detailed field notes during the observations. To enrich the observational findings, we also conducted six semistructured interviews with medication safety experts representing a diversity of perspectives. Barriers and facilitators to safe medication use were identified based on inductive coding of the data.

RESULTS

A variety of safety vulnerabilities plague all stages of the medication use process and many of the well-established evidence-based interventions aimed at improving the safety of medication use at key stages of the process have not been widely implemented in community settings observed in this study. Key safety vulnerabilities identified include: limited English proficiency, low health literacy, lack of clinician continuity, incomplete medication reconciliation and counseling, unsafe medication storage and disposal habits, and conflicting healthcare agendas with caregivers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings underscore a need for overarching, comprehensive interventions that span the entire process of medication use, including integrated communication systems between clinicians, pharmacies, and patients, and a "patient navigator" program that assists patients in navigating the entire medication-taking process. Collective ownership of the medication management system and mutual motivation for devising collaborative solutions is needed among key sectors.

Multiplicity and complexity: a qualitative exploration of influences on prescribing in UK general practice

OBJECTIVES

Despite widespread availability of evidence-based guidelines to inform rational use of medicines, considerable unwarranted variation exists in prescribing. A greater understanding of key determinants of contemporary prescribing in UK general practice could inform strategies to promote evidence-based prescribing. This study explored (1) current influences on prescribing in general practice and (2) the possibility that general practice-based pharmacists (PBPs) may contribute to greater engagement with evidence-based prescribing.

DESIGN

Semistructured, telephone interviews and a focus group were conducted, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was undertaken.

PARTICIPANTS

General practice prescribers: general practitioners (GPs), PBPs, nurses.Key informants: individuals within the National Health Service (NHS) with responsibility for influencing, monitoring and measuring general practice prescribing.

SETTING

General practices and NHS organisations in England.

RESULTS

Interviews with 17 prescribers (GPs (n=6), PBPs (n=6), nurses (n=5)) and 6 key informants, and one focus group with five key informants were undertaken between November 2018 and April 2019. Determinants operating at individual, practice and societal levels impacted prescribing and guideline use. Prescribers' professional backgrounds, for example, nursing, pharmacy, patient populations and patient pressure were perceived as substantial influences, as well as media portrayal and public perceptions of medicines.Prescribers identified practice-level determinants of prescribing, including practice culture and shared beliefs. Key informants tended to emphasise higher-level influences, including NHS policies, availability of support and advice from secondary care and generic challenges associated with medicines use, for example, multimorbidity.Participants expressed mixed views about the potential of PBPs to promote evidence-based prescribing in general practice.

CONCLUSION

Prescribing in UK general practice is influenced by multiple intersecting factors. Strategies to promote evidence-based prescribing should target modifiable influences at practice and individual levels. Customising strategies for medical and non-medical prescribers may maximise their effectiveness.

Improving Primary Care Medication Processes by Using Shared Electronic Medication Plans in Switzerland: Lessons Learned From a Participatory Action Research Study

Background

Several countries have launched health information technology (HIT) systems for shared electronic medication plans. These systems enable patients and health care professionals to use and manage a common list of current medications across sectors and settings. Shared electronic medication plans have great potential to improve medication management and patient safety, but their integration into complex medication-related processes has proven difficult, and there is little scientific evidence to guide their implementation.

Objective

The objective of this paper is to summarize lessons learned from primary care professionals involved in a pioneering pilot project in Switzerland for the systemwide implementation of shared electronic medication plans. We collected experiences, assessed the influences of the local context, and analyzed underlying mechanisms influencing the implementation.

Methods

In this formative action research study, we followed 5 clusters of health care professionals during 6 months. The clusters represented rural and urban primary care settings. A total of 18 health care professionals (primary care physicians, pharmacists, and nurses) used the pilot version of a shared electronic medication plan on a secure web platform, the precursor of Switzerland’s electronic patient record infrastructure. We undertook 3 group interviews with each of the 5 clusters, analyzed the content longitudinally and across clusters, and summarized it into lessons learned.

Results

Participants considered medication plan management, digitalized or not, a core element of good clinical practice. Requirements for the successful implementation of a shared electronic medication plan were the integration into and simplification of clinical routines. Participants underlined the importance of an enabling setting with designated reference professionals and regular high-quality interactions with patients. Such a setting should foster trusting relationships and nurture a culture of safety and data privacy. For participants, the HIT was a necessary but insufficient building block toward better interprofessional communication, especially in transitions. Despite oral and written information, the availability of shared electronic medication plans did not generate spontaneous demand from patients or foster more engagement in their medication management. The variable settings illustrated the diversity of medication management and the need for local adaptations.

Conclusions

The results of our study present a unique and comprehensive description of the sociotechnical challenges of implementing shared electronic medication plans in primary care. The shared ownership among multiple stakeholders is a core challenge for implementers. No single stakeholder can build and maintain a safe, usable HIT system with up-to-date medication information. Buy-in from all involved health care professionals is necessary for consistent medication reconciliation along the entire care pathway. Implementers must balance the need to change clinical processes to achieve improvements with the need to integrate the shared electronic medication plan into existing routines to facilitate adoption. The lack of patient involvement warrants further study.

[Descriptive analysis of medication errors notified by Primary Health Care: Learning from errors]

Introducción y objetivo

El objetivo del presente estudio es describir los errores de medicación (EM) notificados en atención primaria analizando el ámbito, el daño y las causas, y orientando el análisis a las medidas para prevenir estos errores.

Material y métodos

Ámbito: Atención primaria. Servicio Madrileño de Salud. 2016.

Diseño

Estudio descriptivo transversal.

Participantes

Todas las notificaciones de EM realizadas desde los centros de salud en el sistema de notificación de incidentes de seguridad entre el 1 de enero y el 17 de noviembre de 2016 (n = 1.839).

Mediciones principales

Ámbito donde ocurrió el error, daño real, daño potencial y causa del error. Fueron clasificadas por un investigador. Se comprobó la concordancia con otro investigador.

Resultados

En el ámbito del centro de salud ocurrieron el 47% (IC95%: 44,8-49,3%) de los EM y en el entorno del paciente el 26,5% (IC95%: 24,5-28,6%). El 27,5% (IC95%: 24,1-30,8%) de los EM tenían potencialidad de daño grave. En el ámbito del centro de salud, la causa más frecuente fue la prescripción inadecuada: 27,4% (IC95%: 24,4-30,4%). En el entorno del paciente, la causa más frecuente fue el fallo en la comunicación profesional-paciente: 66% (IC95%: 61,8-70,2%), seguida por equivocaciones y despistes del paciente.

Conclusiones

La mitad de los errores de medicación notificados desde atención primaria tiene lugar en el centro de salud mientras que los EM del paciente son la cuarta parte. Uno de cada 4 es un error potencialmente grave. Las causas más importantes son la prescripción inadecuada (incluyendo indicación o dosis incorrecta, interacciones, contraindicaciones y alergias), los fallos en la comunicación profesional-paciente y los despistes en la autoadministración del paciente. Parece prioritario implantar sistemas de ayuda a la prescripción, prácticas seguras efectivas en comunicación profesional-paciente y ayudas que eviten los despistes en la autoadministración del paciente.

Primary care workflow process mapping of medication-related activities performed by non-provider staff: A pilot project's approach

BACKGROUND

A workflow process mapping approach was previously developed to understand the impact of primary care medication use processes on medication safety. The workflow process mapping approach was applied to a pilot project in one primary care practice.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this article is to: (1) exemplify how workflow process mapping was implemented in one primary care practice to characterize medication safety issues (i.e., critical workflow gaps/deviations), (2) discuss the identified critical medication safety workflow gaps and deviations, and (3) summarize the pragmatic, practice-level recommendations developed to enhance practice-level medication safety.

METHODS

Four medication-related activities were directly observed, including: (1) medication reconciliation, (2) warfarin medication management, (3) vaccination administration, and (4) medication renewal requests. Observations occurred with registered nurses, medical assistants, and telephone operators. An ideal-state and observed workflow process map was created for each medication-related activity and was compared to identify critical medication safety workflow gaps and deviations. Practice-level recommendations were developed to enhance workflow and medication safety across all medication-related activities.

RESULTS

111 medication-related observations were recorded over 6-weeks across all 4 workflows (100 observation hours). A total of 17 critical workflow safety gaps, 9 critical workflow step deviations, and 9 workflow sequence deviations were identified. Seventy-six percent of total workflow gaps resulted from inappropriate medication verification. Most workflow step deviations (33%) were due to inappropriate documentation, whereas most sequence deviations (44%) stemmed from inadequate medication verification. Practice-level recommendations to enhance warfarin medication safety were prioritized and implemented prior to the completion of the pilot project.

CONCLUSION

The results of this workflow mapping pilot project exemplify the need to enhance primary care medication safety for workflows conducted by non-provider staff members in primary care practices. Additionally, this approach can be used to identify opportunities for primary care pharmacist integration, particularly for practices with little or no prior pharmacist involvement.

Efficiency and thoroughness trade-offs in high-volume organisational routines: an ethnographic study of prescribing safety in primary care

Background

Prescribing is a high-volume primary care routine where both speed and attention to detail are required. One approach to examining how organisations approach quality and safety in the face of high workloads is Hollnagel’s Efficiency and Thoroughness Trade-Off (ETTO). Hollnagel argues that safety is aligned with thoroughness and that a choice is required between efficiency and thoroughness as it is not usually possible to maximise both. This study aimed to ethnographically examine the efficiency and thoroughness trade-offs made by different UK general practices in the achievement of prescribing safety.

Methods

Non-participant observation was conducted of prescribing routines across eight purposively sampled UK general practices. Sixty-two semistructured interviews were also conducted with key practice staff alongside the analysis of relevant practice documents.

Results

The eight practices in this study adopted different context-specific approaches to safely handling prescription requests by variably prioritising speed of processing by receptionists (efficiency) or general practitioner (GP) clinical judgement (thoroughness). While it was not possible to maximise both at the same time, practices situated themselves at various points on an efficiency-thoroughness spectrum where one approach was prioritised at particular stages of the routine. Both approaches carried strengths and risks, with thoroughness-focused approaches considered safer but more challenging to implement in practice due to GP workload issues. Most practices adopting efficiency-focused approaches did so out of necessity as a result of their high workload due to their patient population (eg, older, socioeconomically deprived).

Conclusions

Hollnagel’s ETTO presents a useful way for healthcare organisations to optimise their own high-volume processes through reflection on where they currently prioritise efficiency and thoroughness, the stages that are particularly risky and improved ways of balancing competing priorities.

Systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) for lung cancer and its potential for interactions with other medicines

Background

Systemic anticancer therapy, comprising chemotherapy agents alongside targeted therapies and immunotherapy, is clinically indicated for late-stage lung cancer. It is delivered in regimens often containing multiple anticancer agents as well as supportive care medicines to reduce side effects, raising potential for polypharmacy and therefore the possibility of drug–drug interactions with medicines taken for comorbidities. A pharmacy-led process commonly performed to assist safe prescribing in secondary care is medicines reconciliation; its benefit in minimising interactions involving systemic anticancer therapy medicines has not been assessed previously.

Objectives

The objectives were to characterise the potential drug–drug interactions between systemic anticancer therapy medicines for lung cancer and other medicines and to evaluate the rate of medicines reconciliation being performed and the extent of documentation of potential interactions (clinical audit).

Methodology

This retrospective case series study involved recording the medicines being taken by lung cancer patients undergoing systemic anticancer therapy elicited in consultations at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, United Kingdom. Potential interactions were identified and characterised in terms of severity using the British National Formulary and other sources. Patient consultation records were also searched for documentation of medicines reconciliation and acknowledgement of potential drug–drug interactions.

Results

Twenty-three patients were included in this study. Eighty-eight potential drug–drug interactions were identified across 21 patients, 39% (34/88) of which involved the supportive care medicine dexamethasone. 3.0% of consultations included a documented medicines reconciliation, and 15.9% of potential interactions were documented in the notes, with no correlation between the two. Potentially serious interactions were significantly more likely to be documented (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Many potential drug–drug interactions involving anticancer agents and supportive care medicines exist; particular attention should be paid to dexamethasone. Documentation of interactions and medicines reconciliation occur much less often than expected, suggesting there is scope for implementing methods of safe prescribing to prevent adverse drug effects.

Prevalence of inappropriate medication use in residential long-term care facilities for the elderly: A systematic review

Background: Multi-morbidity and polypharmacy of the elderly population enhances the probability of elderly in residential long-term care facilities experiencing inappropriate medication use.

Objectives: The aim is to systematically review literature to assess the prevalence of inappropriate medication use in residential long-term care facilities for the elderly.

Methods: Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE) were searched for literature from 2004 to 2016 to identify studies examining inappropriate medication use in residential long-term care facilities for the elderly. Studies were eligible when relying on Beers criteria, STOPP, START, PRISCUS list, ACOVE, BEDNURS or MAI instruments. Inappropriate medication use was defined by the criteria of these seven instruments.

Results: Twenty-one studies met inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies relied on a version of Beers criteria with prevalence ranging between 18.5% and 82.6% (median 46.5%) residents experiencing inappropriate medication use. A smaller range, from 21.3% to 63.0% (median 35.1%), was reported when considering solely the 10 studies that used Beers criteria updated in 2003. Prevalence varied from 23.7% to 79.8% (median 61.1%) in seven studies relying on STOPP. START and ACOVE were relied on in respectively four (prevalence: 30.5–74.0%) and two studies (prevalence: 28.9–58.0%); PRISCUS, BEDNURS and MAI were all used in one study each.

Conclusions: Beers criteria of 2003 and STOPP were most frequently used to determine inappropriate medication use in residential long-term care facilities. Prevalence of inappropriate medication use strongly varied, despite similarities in research design and assessment with identical instrument(s).

Repeat prescribing of medications: A system-centred risk management model for primary care organisations

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Reducing preventable harm from repeat medication prescriptions is a patient safety priority worldwide. In the United Kingdom, repeat prescriptions items issued has doubled in the last 20 years from 5.8 to 13.3 items per patient per annum. This has significant resource implications and consequences for avoidable patient harms. Consequently, we aimed to test a risk management model to identify, measure, and reduce repeat prescribing system risks in primary care.

METHODS

All 48 general medical practices in National Health Service (NHS) Lambeth Clinical Commissioning Group (an inner city area of south London in England) were recruited. Multiple interventions were implemented, including educational workshops, a web-based risk monitoring system, and external reviews of repeat prescribing system risks by clinicians. Data were collected via documentation reviews and interviews and subject to basic thematic and descriptive statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Across the 48 participating general practices, 62 unique repeat prescribing risks were identified on 505 occasions (eg, practices frequently experiencing difficulty interpreting medication changes on hospital discharge summaries), equating to a mean of 8.1 risks per practice (range: 1-33; SD = 7.13). Seven hundred sixty-seven system improvement actions were recommended across 96 categories (eg, alerting hospitals to illegible writing and delays with discharge summaries) with a mean of 15.6 actions per practice (range: 0-34; SD = 8.0).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk management model tested uncovered important safety concerns and facilitated the development and communication of related improvement recommendations. System-wide information on hazardous repeat prescribing and how this could be mitigated is very limited. The approach reported may have potential to close this gap and improve the reliability of general practice systems and patient safety, which should be of high interest to primary care organisations internationally.

Medicines Optimisation Assessment Tool (MOAT): a prognostic model to target hospital pharmacists' input to improve patient outcomes. Protocol for an observational study

INTRODUCTION

Medicines optimisation is a key role for hospital pharmacists, but with ever-increasing demands on services there is a need to increase efficiency while maintaining patient safety. The aim of this study is to develop a prognostic model, the Medicines Optimisation Assessment Tool (MOAT), which can be used to target patients most in need of pharmacists' input while in hospital.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The MOAT will be developed following recommendations of the Prognosis Research Strategy partnership. Using a cohort study we will prospectively include 1500 adult patients from the medical wards of two UK hospitals. Data on medication-related problems (MRPs) experienced by study patients will be collected by pharmacists at the study sites as part of their routine daily clinical assessment of patients. Data on potential risk factors such as polypharmacy, renal impairment and the use of 'high risk' medicines will be collected retrospectively from the information departments at the study sites, laboratory reporting systems and patient medical records. Multivariable logistic regression models will then be used to determine the relationship between potential risk factors and the study outcome of preventable MRPs that are at least moderate in severity. Bootstrapping will be used to adjust the MOAT for optimism, and predictive performance will be assessed using calibration and discrimination. A simplified scoring system will also be developed, which will be assessed for sensitivity and specificity.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Proportionate Review Service Sub-Committee of the National Health Service Research Ethics Committee Wales REC 7 (16/WA/0016) and the Health Research Authority (project ID 197298). We plan to disseminate the results via presentations at relevant patient/public, professional, academic and scientific meetings and conferences, and will submit findings for publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02582463.

Integrating Data From the UK National Reporting and Learning System With Work Domain Analysis to Understand Patient Safety Incidents in Community Pharmacy

OBJECTIVES

To explore the combined use of a critical incident database and work domain analysis to understand patient safety issues in a health-care setting.

METHOD

A retrospective review was conducted of incidents reported to the UK National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) that involved community pharmacy between April 2005 and August 2010. A work domain analysis of community pharmacy was constructed using observational data from 5 community pharmacies, technical documentation, and a focus group with 6 pharmacists. Reports from the NRLS were mapped onto the model generated by the work domain analysis.

RESULTS

Approximately 14,709 incident reports meeting the selection criteria were retrieved from the NRLS. Descriptive statistical analysis of these reports found that almost all of the incidents involved medication and that the most frequently occurring error types were dose/strength errors, incorrect medication, and incorrect formulation. The work domain analysis identified 4 overall purposes for community pharmacy: business viability, health promotion and clinical services, provision of medication, and use of medication. These purposes were served by lower-order characteristics of the work system (such as the functions, processes and objects). The tasks most frequently implicated in the incident reports were those involving medication storage, assembly, or patient medication records.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining the insights from different analytical methods improves understanding of patient safety problems. Incident reporting data can be used to identify general patterns, whereas the work domain analysis can generate information about the contextual factors that surround a critical task.

Development and perceived effects of an educational programme on quality and safety in medication handling in residential facilities

OBJECTIVES

To develop and test an educational programme on quality and safety in medication handling for staff in residential facilities for the disabled.

METHODS

The continuing pharmacy education instructional design model was used to develop the programme with 22 learning objectives on disease and medicines, quality and safety, communication and coordination. The programme was a flexible, modular seven + two days' course addressing quality and safety in medication handling, disease and medicines, and medication supervision and reconciliation. The programme was tested in five Danish municipalities. Municipalities were selected based on their application for participation; each independently selected a facility for residents with mental and intellectual disabilities, and a facility for residents with severe mental illnesses. Perceived effects were measured based on a questionnaire completed by participants before and after the programme. Effects on motivation and confidence as well as perceived effects on knowledge, skills and competences related to medication handling, patient empowerment, communication, role clarification and safety culture were analysed conducting bivariate, stratified analyses and test for independence.

KEY FINDINGS

Of the 114 participants completing the programme, 75 participants returned both questionnaires (response rate = 66%). Motivation and confidence regarding quality and safety in medication handling significantly improved, as did perceived knowledge, skills and competences on 20 learning objectives on role clarification, safety culture, medication handling, patient empowerment and communication.

CONCLUSIONS

The programme improved staffs' motivation and confidence and their perceived ability to handle residents' medication safely through improved role clarification, safety culture, medication handling and patient empowerment and communication skills.

Identification of priorities for improvement of medication safety in primary care: a PRIORITIZE study

BACKGROUND

Medication error is a frequent, harmful and costly patient safety incident. Research to date has mostly focused on medication errors in hospitals. In this study, we aimed to identify the main causes of, and solutions to, medication error in primary care.

METHODS

We used a novel priority-setting method for identifying and ranking patient safety problems and solutions called PRIORITIZE. We invited 500 North West London primary care clinicians to complete an open-ended questionnaire to identify three main problems and solutions relating to medication error in primary care. 113 clinicians submitted responses, which we thematically synthesized into a composite list of 48 distinct problems and 45 solutions. A group of 57 clinicians randomly selected from the initial cohort scored these and an overall ranking was derived. The agreement between the clinicians' scores was presented using the average expert agreement (AEA). The study was conducted between September 2013 and November 2014.

RESULTS

The top three problems were incomplete reconciliation of medication during patient 'hand-overs', inadequate patient education about their medication use and poor discharge summaries. The highest ranked solutions included development of a standardized discharge summary template, reduction of unnecessary prescribing, and minimisation of polypharmacy. Overall, better communication between the healthcare provider and patient, quality assurance approaches during medication prescribing and monitoring, and patient education on how to use their medication were considered the top priorities. The highest ranked suggestions received the strongest agreement among the clinicians, i.e. the highest AEA score.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians identified a range of suggestions for better medication management, quality assurance procedures and patient education. According to clinicians, medication errors can be largely prevented with feasible and affordable interventions. PRIORITIZE is a new, convenient, systematic, and replicable method, and merits further exploration with a view to becoming a part of a routine preventative patient safety monitoring mechanism.

Community pharmacists as educators in Danish residential facilities: a qualitative study

Objectives

To explore experiences with engaging community pharmacists in educational programmes on quality and safety in medication handling in residential facilities for the disabled.

Methods

A secondary analysis of data from two Danish intervention studies where community pharmacists were engaged in educational programmes. Data included 10 semi-structured interviews with staff, five semi-structured interviews and three open-ended questionnaires with residential facility managers, and five open-ended questionnaires to community pharmacists. Data were thematically coded to identify key points pertaining to the themes ‘pharmacists as educators' and ‘perceived effects of engaging pharmacists in competence development'.

Key findings

As educators, pharmacists were successful as medicines experts. Some pharmacists experienced pedagogical challenges. Previous teaching experience and obtained knowledge of the local residential facility before teaching often provided sufficient pedagogical skills and tailored teaching to local needs. Effects of engaging community pharmacists included in most instances improved cooperation between residential facilities and community pharmacies through a trustful relationship and improved dialogue about the residents' medication. Other effects included a perception of improved patient safety, teaching skills and branding of the pharmacy.

Conclusions

Community pharmacists provide a resource to engage in educational programmes on medication handling in residential facilities, which may facilitate improved cooperation between community pharmacies and residential facilities. However, development of pedagogical competences and understandings of local settings are prerequisites for facilities and pharmacists to experience the programmes as successful.

Applying quality improvement methods to address gaps in medicines reconciliation at transfers of care from an acute UK hospital

OBJECTIVES

Reliable reconciliation of medicines at admission and discharge from hospital is key to reducing unintentional prescribing discrepancies at transitions of healthcare. We introduced a team approach to the reconciliation process at an acute hospital with the aim of improving the provision of information and documentation of reliable medication lists to enable clear, timely communications on discharge.

SETTING

An acute 400-bedded teaching hospital in London, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

The effects of change were measured in a simple random sample of 10 adult patients a week on the acute admissions unit over 18 months.

INTERVENTIONS

Quality improvement methods were used throughout. Interventions included education and training of staff involved at ward level and in the pharmacy department, introduction of medication documentation templates for electronic prescribing and for communicating information on medicines in discharge summaries co-designed with patient representatives.

RESULTS

Statistical process control analysis showed reliable documentation (complete, verified and intentional changes clarified) of current medication on 49.2% of patients' discharge summaries. This appears to have improved (to 85.2%) according to a poststudy audit the year after the project end. Pharmacist involvement in discharge reconciliation increased significantly, and improvements in the numbers of medicines prescribed in error, or omitted from the discharge prescription, are demonstrated. Variation in weekly measures is seen throughout but particularly at periods of changeover of new doctors and introduction of new systems.

CONCLUSIONS

New processes led to a sustained increase in reconciled medications and, thereby, an improvement in the number of patients discharged from hospital with unintentional discrepancies (errors or omissions) on their discharge prescription. The initiatives were pharmacist-led but involved close working and shared understanding about roles and responsibilities between doctors, nurses, therapists, patients and their carers.

Supervised pharmacy student-led medication review in primary care for patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To pilot and feasibility-test supervised final year undergraduate pharmacy student-led medication reviews for patients with diabetes to enable definitive trial design.

METHOD

Third year pharmacy students were recruited from one UK School of Pharmacy and trained to review patient's medical records and provide face-to-face consultations under supervision while situated within the patient's medical practice. Patients with type 2 diabetes were recruited by postal invitation letter from their medical practice and randomised via automated system to intervention or usual care. Diabetes-related clinical data, quality of life, patient reported beliefs, adherence and satisfaction with medicines information were collected with validated tools at baseline and 6 months postintervention. The process for collecting resource utilisation data was tested. Stakeholder meetings were held before and after intervention to develop study design and learn from its implementation. Recruitment and attrition rates were determined plus the quality of the outcome data. Power calculations for a definitive trial were performed on the different outcome measures to identify the most appropriate primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

792 patients were identified as eligible from five medical practices. 133 (16.8%) were recruited and randomised to control (n=66) or usual care (n=67). 32 students provided the complete intervention to 58 patients. Initial data analysis showed potential for impact in the right direction for some outcomes measured including glycated haemoglobin, quality of life and patient satisfaction with information about medicines. The intervention was found to be feasible and acceptable to patients. The pilot and feasibility study enabled the design of a future full randomised controlled trial.

CONCLUSIONS

Student and patient recruitment are possible. The intervention was well received and demonstrated some potential benefits. While the intervention was relatively inexpensive and provided an experiential learning opportunity for pharmacy students, its cost-effectiveness remains to be determined.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN26445805; Results.

Incidence- Versus Prevalence-Based Measures of Inappropriate Prescribing in the Veterans Health Administration

OBJECTIVES

To describe variations in potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and characterize the extent to which switching to an incidence-based indicator would affect health system quality rankings.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

Veterans Health Administration in 2011.

PARTICIPANTS

Older adults receiving outpatient primary care.

MEASUREMENTS

PIP was defined according to the National Committee for Quality Assurance High-Risk Medications in the Elderly list. Ranks were separately assigned for prevalent and incident PIP at the regional, network, and healthcare system levels.

RESULTS

National PIP prevalence was 12.3% (167,766/1,360,251), and incidence was 5.8% (78,604/1,360,251). PIP prevalence ranged from 3.5% to 33.1% across healthcare systems (interquartile range (IQR) = 9.2-15.5%). PIP incidence ranged from 1.2% to 14.9% (IQR = 4.1-7.2%). Rank order in PIP prevalence and incidence was correlated (Spearman correlation; ρ = 0.934, P < .001), although substantial changes in ranks were seen for some healthcare systems, with seven of 139 (5.0%) systems shifting more than 30 rank positions and 21 (15.1%) systems shifting 16 to 30 positions.

CONCLUSION

Prevalence- and incidence-based indicators of prescribing quality were strongly correlated. Transitioning to incidence-based indicators would not produce an initial disruption in quality rankings for most healthcare systems and might yield more-salient measures for tracking healthcare quality.

Task analysis of information technology-mediated medication management in outpatient care

Aims

Educating physicians in the procedural as well as cognitive skills of information technology (IT)-mediated medication management could be one of the missing links for the improvement of patient safety. We aimed to compose a framework of tasks that need to be addressed to optimize medication management in outpatient care.

Methods

Formal task analysis: decomposition of a complex task into a set of subtasks. First, we obtained a general description of the medication management process from exploratory interviews. Secondly, we interviewed experts in-depth to further define tasks and subtasks. Setting: Outpatient care in different fields of medicine in six teaching and academic medical centres in the Netherlands and the United States. Participants: 20 experts. Tasks were divided up into procedural, cognitive and macrocognitive tasks and categorized into the three components of dynamic decision making.

Results

The medication management process consists of three components: (i) reviewing the medication situation; (ii) composing a treatment plan; and (iii) accomplishing and communicating a treatment and surveillance plan. Subtasks include multiple cognitive tasks such as composing a list of current medications and evaluating the reliability of sources, and procedural tasks such as documenting current medication. The identified macrocognitive tasks were: planning, integration of IT in workflow, managing uncertainties and responsibilities, and problem detection.

Conclusions

All identified procedural, cognitive and macrocognitive skills should be included when designing education for IT-mediated medication management. The resulting framework supports the design of educational interventions to improve IT-mediated medication management in outpatient care.

Developing a preliminary 'never event' list for general practice using consensus-building methods

BACKGROUND

The 'never event' concept has been implemented in many acute hospital settings to help prevent serious patient safety incidents. Benefits include increasing awareness of highly important patient safety risks among the healthcare workforce, promoting proactive implementation of preventive measures, and facilitating incident reporting.

AIM

To develop a preliminary list of never events for general practice.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Application of a range of consensus-building methods in Scottish and UK general practices.

METHOD

A total of 345 general practice team members suggested potential never events. Next, 'informed' staff (n =15) developed criteria for defining never events and applied the criteria to create a list of candidate never events. Finally, UK primary care patient safety 'experts' (n = 17) reviewed, refined, and validated a preliminary list via a modified Delphi group and by completing a content validity index exercise.

RESULTS

There were 721 written suggestions received as potential never events. Thematic categorisation reduced this to 38. Five criteria specific to general practice were developed and applied to produce 11 candidate never events. The expert group endorsed a preliminary list of 10 items with a content validity index (CVI) score of >80%.

CONCLUSION

A preliminary list of never events was developed for general practice through practitioner experience and consensus-building methods. This is an important first step to determine the potential value of the never event concept in this setting. It is now intended to undertake further testing of this preliminary list to assess its acceptability, feasibility, and potential usefulness as a safety improvement intervention.

A systematic review of patient medication error on self-administering medication at home

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors have been analyzed as a health professionals' responsibility (due to mistakes in prescription, preparation or dispensing). However, sometimes, patients themselves (or their caregivers) make mistakes in the administration of the medication. The epidemiology of patient medication errors (PEs) has been scarcely reviewed in spite of its impact on people, on therapeutic effectiveness and on incremental cost for the health systems.

AREAS COVERED

This study reviews and describes the methodological approaches and results of published studies on the frequency, causes and consequences of medication errors committed by patients at home. A review of research articles published between 1990 and 2014 was carried out using MEDLINE, Web-of-Knowledge, Scopus, Tripdatabase and Index Medicus.

EXPERT OPINION

The frequency of PE was situated between 19 and 59%. The elderly and the preschooler population constituted a higher number of mistakes than others. The most common were: incorrect dosage, forgetting, mixing up medications, failing to recall indications and taking out-of-date or inappropriately stored drugs. The majority of these mistakes have no negative consequences. Health literacy, information and communication and complexity of use of dispensing devices were identified as causes of PEs. Apps and other new technologies offer several opportunities for improving drug safety.

Identifying competencies required for medication prescribing for general practice residents: a nominal group technique study

Background

Teaching of medication prescribing is a specific challenge in general practice curriculum. The aim of this study was to identify and rank the competencies required for prescribing medication for general practice residents in France.

Methods

Qualitative consensus study using the nominal group technique. We invited different stakeholders of the general practice curriculum and medication use in primary care to a series of meetings. The nominal group technique allowed for the quick development of a list of consensual and ranked answers to the following question: “At the end of their general practice curriculum, in terms of medication prescribing, what should residents be able to do?”.

Results

Four meetings were held that involved a total of 31 participants, enabling the creation of a final list of 29 ranked items, grouped in 4 domains. The four domains identified were ‘pharmacology’, ‘regulatory standards’, ‘therapeutics’, and ‘communication (both with patients and healthcare professionals)’. Overall, the five items the most highly valued across the four meetings were: ‘write a legible and understandable prescription’, ‘identify specific populations’, ‘prescribe the doses and durations following the indication’, ‘explain a lack of medication prescription to the patient’, ‘decline inappropriate medication request’. The ‘communication skills’ domain was the domain with the highest number of items (10 items), and with the most highly-valued items.

Conclusion

The study results suggest a need for developing general practice residents’ communication skills regarding medication prescribing.

Cost effectiveness of a pharmacist-led information technology intervention for reducing rates of clinically important errors in medicines management in general practices (PINCER)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

We recently showed that a pharmacist-led information technology-based intervention (PINCER) was significantly more effective in reducing medication errors in general practices than providing simple feedback on errors, with cost per error avoided at £79 (US$131). We aimed to estimate cost effectiveness of the PINCER intervention by combining effectiveness in error reduction and intervention costs with the effect of the individual errors on patient outcomes and healthcare costs, to estimate the effect on costs and QALYs.

METHODS

We developed Markov models for each of six medication errors targeted by PINCER. Clinical event probability, treatment pathway, resource use and costs were extracted from literature and costing tariffs. A composite probabilistic model combined patient-level error models with practice-level error rates and intervention costs from the trial. Cost per extra QALY and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated from the perspective of NHS England, with a 5-year time horizon.

RESULTS

The PINCER intervention generated £2,679 less cost and 0.81 more QALYs per practice [incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER): -£3,037 per QALY] in the deterministic analysis. In the probabilistic analysis, PINCER generated 0.001 extra QALYs per practice compared with simple feedback, at £4.20 less per practice. Despite this extremely small set of differences in costs and outcomes, PINCER dominated simple feedback with a mean ICER of -£3,936 (standard error £2,970). At a ceiling 'willingness-to-pay' of £20,000/QALY, PINCER reaches 59 % probability of being cost effective.

CONCLUSIONS

PINCER produced marginal health gain at slightly reduced overall cost. Results are uncertain due to the poor quality of data to inform the effect of avoiding errors.

Custom and practice: a multi-center study of medicines reconciliation following admission in four acute hospitals in the UK

BACKGROUND

Many studies have highlighted the problems associated with different aspects of medicines reconciliation (MR). These have been followed by numerous recommendations of good practice shown in published studies to decrease error; however, there is little to suggest that practice has significantly changed. The study reported here was conducted to review local medicines reconciliation practice and compare it to data within previously published evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To determine current medicines reconciliation practice in four acute hospitals (A-D) in one region of the United Kingdom and compare it to published best practices.

METHOD

Quantitative data on key indicators were collected prospectively from medical wards in the four hospitals using a proforma compiled from existing literature and previous, validated audits. Data were collected on: i) time between admission and MR being undertaken; ii) time to conduct MR; iii) number and type of sources used to ascertain current medication; and iv) number, type and potential severity of unintended discrepancies. The potential severity of the discrepancies was retrospectively dually rated in 10% of the sample using a professional panel.

RESULTS

Of the 250 charts reviewed (54 Hospital A, 61 Hospital B, 69 Hospital C, 66 Hospital D), 37.6% (92/245) of patients experienced at least one discrepancy on their drug chart, with the majority of these being omissions (237/413, 57.1%). A total of 413 discrepancies were discovered, an overall mean of 1.69 (413/245) discrepancies per patient. The number of sources used to reconcile medicines varied with 36.8% (91/247) only using one source of information and the patient being used as a source in less than half of all medicines reconciliations (45.7%, 113/247). In three out of the four hospitals the discrepancies were most frequently categorized as potentially requiring increased monitoring or intervention.

CONCLUSION

This study shows higher rates of unintended discrepancies per patient than those in previous studies, with omission being the most frequently occurring type of discrepancy. None of the four centers adhered to current UK guidance on medicines reconciliation. All four centers demonstrated a strong reliance on General Practitioner (GP)-based sources. A minority of discrepancies had the potential to cause injury to patients and to increase utilization of health care resources. There is a need to review current practice and procedures at transitions in care to improve the accuracy of medication history-taking at admission by doctors and to encourage pharmacy staff to use an increased number of sources to validate the medication history. Although early research indicates that safety can be improved through patient involvement, this study found that patients were not involved in the majority of reconciliation encounters.

Medication management capacity in relation to cognition and self-management skills in older people on polypharmacy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the medication management capacity of independently living older people (≥75 years) on polypharmacy (≥ 5 medications) in relation to their cognitive- and self-management skills.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Two homecare organizations in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Homecare clients aged 75 and older on polypharmacy (N=95).

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome measure was medication management capacity, quantified as the number of 'yes' answers (range = 0-17) on the Medication Management Capacity (MMC) questionnaire. Other measures included self-management ability (assessed with the SMAS30) and cognitive skills (assessed with the clock drawing test).

RESULTS

Overall, 48.4% (n= 46) of the participants were able to manage their medication by themselves at home. About 40% of the participants were unable to state the names of their medications, even with the aid of a medication list, and about 25% reported having problems with opening medication packages. Correlations were found between self-management ability (Rs = 0.473; p < 0.001), cognitive skills (Rs = 0.372; p < 0.001), and age (Rs = 0.216; p < 0.005) and Medication Management Capacity score. Self-management ability and medication management support were significantly associated with medication management capacity.

CONCLUSION

A considerable proportion of independently living older people who receive home care and regularly use five or more medications lack the knowledge and skills needed to independently manage their own medications. Cognition and self management ability were related to medication management capacity. Self-management ability and medication management support were predictors of medication management capacity.

Missed drug therapy alerts as a consequence of incomplete electronic patient records in Dutch community pharmacies

BACKGROUND

Complete and up-to-date medical and pharmaceutical information in the electronic patient record (EPR) is a prerequisite for risk management in community pharmacy.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze which information is missing in the EPR and which drug therapy alerts, therefore, fail to appear.

METHODS

Pharmacy students selected patients who were dispensed a prescription drug and enlisted for >3 months in the participating pharmacies. Patients received a questionnaire in which they were asked to verify their medication history, and to provide additional patient information. For each enrolled patient, the students collected all relevant information from the EPR. Self-reported data from the patient were compared with data retrieved from the EPR. Missed information in the EPR was evaluated based on national professional guidelines.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were received from 67% of the selected patients (442/660). Prescription drugs were missing in the EPR of 14% of the 442 patients, nonprescription drugs in 44%, diseases in 83%, and intolerabilities in 16%. In 38% of the patients (166/442), drug therapy alerts failed to appear because of missing information: drug-disease interactions in 34% of the patients, duplicate medications in 4%, drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in 4%, and drug intolerabilities in 2%. Among the (non-)prescription drugs missing, NSAIDs were most frequently responsible for the missed alerts. Diseases most frequently associated with missed alerts were gastroesophageal reflux disease, renal insufficiency, asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Relevant patient information was frequently missing in the EPRs. The nonappearance of drug therapy alerts may have had clinical consequences for patients.

Have we improved use of medicines in developing and transitional countries and do we know how to? Two decades of evidence

OBJECTIVE

To assess progress in improving use of medicines in developing and transitional countries by reviewing empirical evidence, 1990-2009, concerning patterns of primary care medicine use and intervention effects.

METHODS

We extracted data on medicines use, study setting, methodology and interventions from published and unpublished studies on primary care medicine use. We calculated the medians of six medicines use indicators by study year, country income level, geographic region, facility ownership and prescriber type. To estimate intervention impacts, we calculated greatest positive (GES) and median effect sizes (MES) from studies meeting accepted design criteria.

RESULTS

Our review comprises 900 studies conducted in 104 countries, reporting data on 1033 study groups from public (62%), and private (mostly for profit) facilities (26%), and households. The proportion of treatment according to standard treatment guidelines was 40% in public and <30% in private-for-profit sector facilities. Most indicators showed suboptimal use and little progress over time: Average number of medicines prescribed per patient increased from 2.1 to 2.8 and the percentage of patients receiving antibiotics from 45% to 54%. Of 405 (39%) studies reporting on interventions, 110 (27%) used adequate study design and were further analysed. Multicomponent interventions had larger effects than single component ones. Median GES was 40% for provider and consumer education with supervision, 17% for provider education alone and 8% for distribution of printed education materials alone. Median MES showed more modest improvements.

CONCLUSIONS

Inappropriate medicine use remains a serious global problem.

Is Mindful Reflective Practice the way forward to reduce medication errors?

Background

Medication errors can seriously affect patients and healthcare professionals. In over 60% of cases, medication errors are associated with one or more contributory; individual factors including staff being forgetful, stressed, tired or engaged in multiple tasks simultaneously, often alongside being distracted or interrupted. Routinised hospital practice can lead professionals to work in a state of mindlessness, where it is easy to be unaware of how both body and mind are functioning.

Objective

Mindfulness, defined as moment-to-moment awareness of the everyday experience, could represent a useful strategy to improve reflection in pharmacy practice. The importance of reflection to reduce diagnostic errors in medicine has been supported in the literature; however, in pharmaceutical care, reflection has also only been discussed to a limited extent. There is expanding evidence on the effectiveness of mindfulness in the treatment of many mental and physical health problems in the general population, as well as its role in enhancing decision making, empathy and reducing burnout or fatigue in medical staff.

Considering the benefits of mindfulness, the authors suggest that healthcare professionals should be encouraged to develop their practice of mindfulness. This would not only be beneficial in relieving stress, increasing attention levels and awareness, but it is believed that the integration of mindfulness and reflective practice in a ‘Mindful Reflective Practice’ could minimise some of the individual factors that lead to medication errors.

Conclusions

Mindfulness Reflective Practice could therefore represent an important element in pre-registration education and continual professional development for pharmacists and other healthcare professionals.

Physician patient communication failure facilitates medication errors in older polymedicated patients with multiple comorbidities

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the frequency of mistakes in communication between the physician and the patient and their incidence in errors in self-administered drugs.

METHODS

We undertook a descriptive, cross-sectional study based on interviews with a random sample of patients older than 65 years who were polymedicated (five or more drugs) and had multiple comorbidities. Data were analysed about the patients' reports of what the physician said, medication mistakes by the patients and their consequences.

RESULTS

Responses were provided by 382 patients. A medication error in the last year was reported by 287 patients (75%), and 16 patients (4%) reported four or more errors. Most cases concerned the dosage, a similar appearance of the medication or a lack of understanding of the physician's instructions. Very severe consequences occurred in 19 cases (5%). Multiple comorbidities (P = 0.006) and a greater number of treatments (P = 0.002) were associated with making mistakes. Frequent changes in prescription (P = 0.02), not considering the prescriptions of other physicians (P = 0.01), inconsistency in the messages (P = 0.01), being treated by various different physicians at the same time (P = 0.03), a feeling of not being listened to (P < 0.001) or loss of trust in the physician (P < 0.001) were associated with making medication mistakes.

CONCLUSIONS

Mistakes by polymedicated patients with multiple comorbidities represent a real risk that should be addressed by the professionals. A review should be made of the routine control questions that the physician asks the patient to identify what other drugs the patient may be taking that have been indicated by another physician.

Developing the Diagnostic Adherence to Medication Scale (the DAMS) for use in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

There is a need for an adherence measure, to monitor adherence services in clinical practice, which can distinguish between different types of non-adherence and measure changes over time. In order to be inclusive of all patients it needs to be able to be administered to both patients and carers and to be suitable for patients taking multiple medications for a range of clinical conditions. A systematic review found that no adherence measure met all these criteria. We therefore wished to develop a theory based adherence scale (the DAMS) and establish its content, face and preliminary construct validity in a primary care population.

METHODS

The DAMS (consisting of 6 questions) was developed from theory by a multidisciplinary team and the questions were initially tested in small patient populations. Further to this, patients were recruited when attending a General Practice and interviewed using the DAMS and two other validated self-reported adherence measures, the Morisky-8 and Lu questionnaires. A semi-structured interview was used to explore acceptability and reasons for differences in responses between the DAMS and the other measures. Descriptive data were generated and Spearman rank correlation tests were used to identify associations between the DAMS and the other adherence measures.

RESULTS

One hundred patients completed the DAMS in an average of 1 minute 28 seconds and reported finding it straightforward to complete. An adherence score could not be calculated for the 4(4%) patients only taking 'when required' medication. Thirty six(37.5%) of the remaining patients reported some non-adherence. Adherence ratings of the DAMS were significantly associated with levels of self reported adherence on all other measures Spearman Rho 0.348-0.719, (p < 0.01). Differences in trends could generally be explained by qualitative data.

CONCLUSION

The DAMS has been developed for routine monitoring of adherence in clinical practice. It was acceptable to patients taking single or multiple medication and valid when tested against other adherence measures. However, 'when required' medication needs to be excluded. Further tests of the DAMS against objective measures such as MEMS are in progress and reliability needs to be established. Further investigation of the carers' version of the DAMS is required.

The association between pain intensity and the prescription of analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

BACKGROUND

It is not known whether general practitioners (GPs) prescribe analgesic medication according to intensity of pain or a hierarchical prescribing regimen.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to assess the association of strength of pain-relief medication prescribed by the GP with the strength of previous prescription and pain level.

METHODS

The PROG-RES study collected data on pain intensity in 428 patients aged ≥50 years with non-inflammatory musculoskeletal pain during a consultation with their GP. Prescriptions for analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were identified on the day of the consultation and in the previous year and were classified as basic, moderate or strong analgesic or NSAID. Regression models were used to assess the association of strength of analgesia and prescription of a NSAID with the strength of previous prescription and the level of pain.

RESULTS

The majority of patients were not prescribed medication for their pain at the index consultation, but had such a prescription the previous year. There was an association between strength of analgesic and intensity of pain: more intense pain resulted in a stronger drug. This association was attenuated by adjustment for prescribed analgesia in the previous year. There was no association between intensity of pain and NSAID prescription, but previous NSAID prescription predicted another such prescription.

CONCLUSION

GPs do not always issue prescriptions for musculoskeletal pain. In cases where a prescription is issued, this is more strongly influenced by previous prescriptions than the patient's pain level. GPs adopt an individualized approach to the treatment of musculoskeletal pain in older adults.

A pharmacist-led information technology intervention for medication errors (PINCER): a multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are common in primary care and are associated with considerable risk of patient harm. We tested whether a pharmacist-led, information technology-based intervention was more effective than simple feedback in reducing the number of patients at risk of measures related to hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring of medicines 6 months after the intervention.

METHODS

In this pragmatic, cluster randomised trial general practices in the UK were stratified by research site and list size, and randomly assigned by a web-based randomisation service in block sizes of two or four to one of two groups. The practices were allocated to either computer-generated simple feedback for at-risk patients (control) or a pharmacist-led information technology intervention (PINCER), composed of feedback, educational outreach, and dedicated support. The allocation was masked to researchers and statisticians involved in processing and analysing the data. The allocation was not masked to general practices, pharmacists, patients, or researchers who visited practices to extract data. [corrected]. Primary outcomes were the proportions of patients at 6 months after the intervention who had had any of three clinically important errors: non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) prescribed to those with a history of peptic ulcer without co-prescription of a proton-pump inhibitor; β blockers prescribed to those with a history of asthma; long-term prescription of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or loop diuretics to those 75 years or older without assessment of urea and electrolytes in the preceding 15 months. The cost per error avoided was estimated by incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. This study is registered with Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN21785299.

FINDINGS

72 general practices with a combined list size of 480,942 patients were randomised. At 6 months' follow-up, patients in the PINCER group were significantly less likely to have been prescribed a non-selective NSAID if they had a history of peptic ulcer without gastroprotection (OR 0·58, 95% CI 0·38-0·89); a β blocker if they had asthma (0·73, 0·58-0·91); or an ACE inhibitor or loop diuretic without appropriate monitoring (0·51, 0·34-0·78). PINCER has a 95% probability of being cost effective if the decision-maker's ceiling willingness to pay reaches £75 per error avoided at 6 months.

INTERPRETATION

The PINCER intervention is an effective method for reducing a range of medication errors in general practices with computerised clinical records.

FUNDING

Patient Safety Research Portfolio, Department of Health, England.