Pharmacist-acquired medication histories in a university hospital emergency department

Speed and Accuracy of Recording Medication History by Pharmacists in Secondary Emergency Rooms

In Japan, only few hospitals have pharmacists in their secondary emergency rooms to record medication history and provide drug information in real time. In this study, we investigated the benefits of pharmacist intervention in secondary emergency rooms by comparing the time taken by the pharmacists and non-pharmacists in the emergency room to record the medication history in the electronic medical record and the accuracy of its content. The study period was from September 1 to September 30, 2022, and included patients who were transported to our hospital for emergency care between 9:00 and 16:30. We compared the time taken between the patient's arrival until the recording of their medication history and the accuracy of the record by the emergency room pharmacists and non-pharmacists (paramedics or medical clerks). The study included 58 patients whose medication histories were collected by pharmacists, and 11 patients whose histories were collected by non-pharmacists. For pharmacists, the median time to record medication history in the electronic medical record was 12 min, whereas for non-pharmacists, it was 19 min, which was significantly different (p=0.015). The pharmacists accurately recorded the medication history of 98.3% (57/58) of patients, whereas non-pharmacists accurately recorded it for only 54.5% (6/11) of patients, with a significant difference (p<0.01). We observed that in secondary emergency rooms, when pharmacists were responsible for recording the patients' medication histories, it resulted in rapid and accurate sharing of medication history.

[Medication reconciliation: Interests and limits]

Admission to hospital is a critical transition point for the continuity of care in medication management. Medication reconciliation can identify and resolve errors due to inaccurate medication histories. The practice of medication reconciliation is securing for the patient because of the medication errors detected with significant clinical impact. Its implementation must comply with the recommendations of the French National Authority for Health (HAS) and its deployment is now integrated into the contract for improving the quality and efficiency of care (CAQES). However, although it allows to intercept medication errors, its impact on the length of hospitalization, the rate of readmission and/or death following discharge seems limited. Given the limited human resources to carry out this time-consuming activity, patient prioritization should be considered. Studies on the fate of patients and on the medico-economic issues are also necessary in order to make this activity sustainable.

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.

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.

Interception of chronic medication discrepancies by the clinical pharmacist in the emergency department

The emergency department (ED) is a high-risk setting for the occurrence of medication discrepancies (MDs) due to inconsistencies between real and documented chronic medication therapies. A clinical pharmacist (CP) improves medication safety by performing a structured medication reconciliation on ED admission. The main objective was to identify the frequency and type of MDs in the chronic medication therapy by comparing the medication displayed in the home medication module of the electronic medical record and in the genereal practitioner's (GP) referral letter with the best possible medication history by performing a structured medication reconciliation on ED admission. This prospective, monocentric, interventional study was carried out in the ED of a tertiary care university hospital in Brussels, Belgium. Inclusion criteria were patients of at least 65 years, polypharmacy, ED admission between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. on weekdays, hospitalization and signed informed consent. During 24 days, a CP performed a structured medication reconciliation in order to obtain the best possible medication history and registered all MDs. The CP compared the best possible medication history with the home medication module and the GP's referral letter and registered the different types of MDs. Eighty-three patients were included. The median number of medications in the home medication module and the best possible medication history was significantly different {7.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 5.0-11.0] vs. 8.0 (IQR, 6.0-11.0)/patient; P < 0.0001} with a median of 5.0 (IQR, 3.0-8.0) MDs per patient. Main MDs were omission (38.8%), addition (18.4%) and a deviant administration time (15.2%). Only 22.9% of patients ( N = 19) had a GP's referral letter containing their chronic medication therapy. The median number of medications in the GP's referral letter and the best possible medication history were significantly different [6.0 (IQR, 4.0-9.0) vs. 8.0 (IQR, 7.0-11.0)/patient; P < 0.0001] with a median of 6.0 (IQR, 5.0-11.0) MDs per patient. Main MDs were omissions (39.9%), deviant frequencies (35.3%) and doses (16.7%). A CP, integrated in a multidisciplinary ED team, enhances medication safety by intercepting MDs on ED admission. Few patients possess a GP's referral letter containing their chronic medication therapy and when they do, the accuracy and completeness are poor.

Involvement of Pharmacists in the Emergency Department to Correct Errors in the Medication History and the Impact on Adverse Drug Event Detection

(1) Incomplete or wrong medication histories can lead to missed diagnoses of Adverse Drug Effects (ADEs). We aimed to evaluate pharmacist-identified ED errors in the medication histories obtained by physicians, and their consequences for ADE detection. (2) This prospective monocentric study was carried out in an ED of a university hospital. We included adult patients presenting with an ADE detected in the ED. The best possible medication histories collected by pharmacists were used to identify errors in the medication histories obtained by physicians. We described these errors, and identified those related to medications involved in ADEs. We also identified the ADEs that could not have been detected without the pharmacists' interventions. (3) Of 735 patients presenting with an ADE, 93.1% had at least one error on the medication list obtained by physicians. Of the 1047 medications involved in ADEs, 51.3% were associated with an error in the medication history. In total, 23.1% of the medications involved in ADEs were missing in the physicians' medication histories and were corrected by the pharmacists. (4) Medication histories obtained by ED physicians were often incomplete, and half the medications involved in ADEs were not identified, or were incorrectly characterized in the physicians' medication histories.

Challenges and opportunities in creating a deprescribing program in the emergency department: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

As the population of older adults increases, appropriate deprescribing becomes increasingly important for emergency geriatric care. Older adults represent the sickest patients with chronic medical conditions, and they are often exposed to high-risk medications. We need to provide an evidence-based, standardized deprescribing program in the acute care setting, yet the evidence base is lacking and standardized medication programs are needed.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study with the goal to understand the perspective of healthcare workers, patients, and caregivers on deprescribing high-risk medications in the context of emergency care practices, provider preferences, and practice variability, along with the facilitators and barriers to an effective deprescribing program in the emergency department (ED). To ensure rich, contextual data, the study utilized two qualitative methods: (1) a focus group with physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, pharmacists, and geriatricians involved in care of older adults and their prescriptions in the acute care setting; (2) semi-structured interviews with patients and caregivers involved in treatment and emergency care. Transcriptions were coded using thematic content analysis, and the principal investigator (S.L.) and trained research staff categorized each code into themes.

RESULTS

Data collection from a focus group with healthcare workers (n = 8) and semi-structured interviews with patients and caregivers (n = 20) provided evidence of a potentially promising ED medication program, aligned with the vision of comprehensive care of older adults, that can be used to evaluate practices and develop interventions. We identified four themes: (1) Challenges in medication history taking, (2) missed opportunities in identifying high-risk medications, (3) facilitators and barriers to deprescribing recommendations, and (4) how to coordinate deprescribing recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Our focus group and semi-structured interviews resulted in a framework for an ED medication program to screen, identify, and deprescribe high-risk medications for older adults and coordinate their care with primary care providers.

New ways of working releasing general practitioner capacity with pharmacy prescribing support: a cost-consequence analysis

BACKGROUND

General practice in the United Kingdom is experiencing a workforce crisis. Greater multidisciplinary working, including more general practice pharmacists, is seen as part of the solution. However, it is unknown what impact and cost-consequences that pharmacists may have in freeing general practitioner (GP) capacity.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-consequences of additional pharmacists in releasing GP capacity.

METHODS

This cost-consequences evaluation of a prospective observational cohort study in 15 urban practices involving 69 GPs in 1 locality serving a population of 82,000 people. GPs recorded the time they spent addressing key targeted prescribing activities during 5 distinct 2-week audit periods. Pharmacists performed these key prescribing activities to release GP capacity. An additional 225 h of pharmacists' time per week was committed to the locality. Standardized staff costings were used to estimate the financial impact. Prescribing indicator performance was assessed against the other 7 localities within the health board.

RESULTS

When compared with employing extra nonsalaried GPs this required an estimated additional investment of £16.73 (range £5.97-20.87) per h to free GP capacity. This achieved a sustainable 47% (73 h per week, F(4,56) = 16.05, P < 0.001) reduction in GP time spent on key prescribing activities; equating to 4.9 h (95% confidence interval 3.1-6.7) per practice per week. No significant step changes in locality safety and quality prescribing measures, and no negative effects on locality-level prescribing cost-efficiency work were observed.

CONCLUSION

Appropriately resourced general practice pharmacy teams delivered prescribing cost-efficiencies as well as sustainably freeing GP capacity by performing key prescribing activities.

Effects of a pharmacy-driven medication history program on patient outcomes

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

Obtaining an accurate medication history is a vital component of medication reconciliation upon admission to the hospital. Despite the importance of this task, medication histories are often inaccurate and/or incomplete. We evaluated the association of a pharmacy-driven medication history initiative on clinical outcomes of patients admitted to the general medicine service of an academic medical center.

METHODS

Comparing patients who received a pharmacy-driven medication history to those who did not, a retrospective stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting propensity score analysis was used to estimate the average treatment effect of the intervention on general medical patients. Fifty-two patient baseline characteristics including demographic, operational, and clinical variables were controlled in the propensity score model. Hospital length of stay, 7-day and 30-day unplanned readmissions, and in-hospital mortality were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 11,576 eligible general medical patients, 2,234 (19.30%) received a pharmacy-driven medication history and 9,342 (80.70%) patients did not. The estimated average treatment effect of receiving a pharmacy-driven medication history was a shorter length of stay (mean, 5.88 days vs 6.53 days; P = 0.0002) and a lower in-hospital mortality rate (2.34% vs 3.72%, P = 0.001), after adjustment for differences in patient baseline characteristics. No significant difference was found for 7-day or 30-day all-cause readmission rates.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacy-driven medication histories reduced length of stay and in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to the general medical service at an academic medical center but did not change 7-day and 30-day all-cause readmission rates. Further research via a large, multisite randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm our findings.

Written communication about the use of medications in medical records in a Brazilian hospital

BACKGROUND

Effective communication regarding the use of medications in hospital environments is a process that contributes to patient safety. Despite its importance, written communication about the medication use process in medical records remains insufficiently investigated.

AIM

To describe the documentation in medical records regarding the medication use process by pharmacists, physicians and nurses on admission, during the hospital stay, and at hospital discharge.

METHOD

A retrospective cross-sectional chart review study was carried out in medical records of patients admitted to a teaching hospital in Northeast Brazil. The study considered all patients admitted between December 2016 and February 2017, aged 18 or older and hospitalised for at least 48 hours. Clinical notes made by pharmacists, physicians and nurses were examined at three transition points of care. Data were collected using a questionnaire relating to the use of medications prior to hospital admission, changes in the prescribed medications during the hospital stay and discharge, as well as prescription non-conformities. Communication failures between the three healthcare professional groups were analysed and classified. The study was authorised by the Hospital's Board of Directors and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Sergipe.

RESULTS

This study included 202 medical records of patients with a mean age of 51.48 (SD 6.42, range: 19-97) years. There was no record of a patient or relative interview on allergies and adverse drug reactions in 54 (26.8%) physician notes, 44 (21.9%) nursing notes, and 9 (25.0%) pharmacist notes. Moreover, 1,588 changes in prescriptions were identified during data collection, and 1,198 (75.4%) of these were unjustified.

CONCLUSION

Medication-related information in medical records was incomplete and inconsistent in the clinical notes of the three studied professions, especially in pharmacists' documentation. Future studies should focus on investigating the consequences of interprofessional communication in patient care.

Clinically Significant Bradycardia and Hypotension Following Consumption of Betel Leaf in a Patient Treated for Chronic Atrial Fibrillation

PURPOSE

A case of new onset bradycardia and hypotension following betel leaf consumption in combination with verapamil and metoprolol in an atrial fibrillation (AF) patient.

SUMMARY

A 66-year-old Nigerian woman presented to the emergency department for evaluation of multiple near syncope episodes with underlying AF and slow ventricular response. After initial evaluation, the patient disclosed she had ingested several betel leaves that morning. She was admitted for observation of severe, progressive hypotension and symptomatic bradycardia. Her past medical history included AF, type 2 diabetes, asthma, obesity, hypertension and hypothyroidism. Her home medications consisted of spironolactone, metoprolol succinate, and verapamil ER. Upon admission, her home medications were held. She received IV fluids and atropine .4 mg IV as needed for symptomatic bradycardia. Approximately 18 h following admission, her vital signs stabilized and her labs returned to baseline. She remained stable and was discharged with a recommendation to continue her home medications at prescribed doses with reduced doses of verapamil and metoprolol and to follow-up with her primary care provider.

CONCLUSION

A patient with a history of AF developed significant hypotension and symptomatic bradycardia after betel leaf consumption resulting in an overnight critical care unit admission. The use of betel leaf is not common in the United States; however, practitioners should be cognizant of the use of complementary and alternative medications like betel leaf and incorporate this knowledge in patient evaluation. Patients consuming betel leaf or betel nut should be evaluated for cardiovascular effects as well as laboratory evaluation for organ damage.

Involvement of emergency medicine pharmacists in stroke thrombolysis: A cohort study

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Thrombolysis with Alteplase (rtPA) improves functional outcome among selected patients after acute ischaemic stroke. Benefits are most pronounced with early intervention. Our aim is to assess door to needle time (DTNT) for acute stroke after a stroke call-out redesign including addition of an emergency medicine (EM) pharmacist to the team.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of stroke patients who received rtPA was compared to a prospective cohort after stroke callout re-design in an adult major referral hospital in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. All patients who presented during EM pharmacist working hours and were thrombolysed in the ED for stroke from December 2011-June 2014 pre and July 1^st 2014-August 2019 post were included. The primary outcome was DTNT. Secondary outcomes included proportion of patients with a DTNT within 60 min, time to blood pressure (SBP) reduction, intracranial and extracranial bleeding, hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

There were 218 patients eligible, 64 patients pre and 122 patients post implementation were included. The cohorts were similar in demographics. There was a significant association of time to thrombolysis (HR 1.61; 95% CI: 1.18-2.20; p = 0.003) with the intervention. Median DTNT improved from 73 (IQR 52-111) min to 61 (IQR 47-80) min (p = 0.012). Interrupted time-series analysis did not demonstrate intervention at the single time-point of implementation of the intervention to be associated with the improvement.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Re-design of the stroke call-out team that included addition of an EM pharmacist was associated with improvements in DTNT. The effect of individual interventions at one point in time could not be demonstrated.

Effectiveness of a multicomponent pharmacist intervention at hospital discharge for drug-related problems: A cluster randomised cross-over trial

AIMS

The aim of this study was to assess whether a pharmacist intervention associating medication reconciliation at discharge with a link to the community pharmacist reduces drug-related problems (DRP) in adult patients during the 7 days after hospital discharge in 22 university or general hospitals in France.

METHODS

We conducted a cluster randomised cross-over superiority trial with hospital units as the cluster unit. The primary outcome was a composite of any kind of DRP (prescription/dispensation, patient error or gap due to no medication available) during the 7 days after discharge, assessed by phone with the patient and community pharmacist. Among secondary outcomes, we studied self-reported unplanned hospitalisations at day 35 after discharge and severe iatrogenic problems.

RESULTS

A total of 1092 patients were enrolled in 48 units (538 in the experimental periods and 554 in the control periods). Three patients refused to have their data analysed and were excluded from the analyses. As compared with usual care, the pharmacist intervention led to a lower proportion of patients with at least one DRP (44.0% vs 50.6%; odds ratio [OR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.98) and severe iatrogenic problems (5.2% vs 8.7%; OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.93) but no significant difference in unplanned hospitalisations at day 35 (5.8% vs 4.5%; OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.91-2.35).

CONCLUSION

Medication reconciliation associated with communication between the hospital and community pharmacist may decrease patient exposure to DRP and severe iatrogenic problems but not unplanned hospitalisation. However, this intervention could be recommended in health policies to improve drug management.

A qualitative study of prescribing errors among multi-professional prescribers within an e-prescribing system

Background Computerised Physician Order Entry (CPOE) is considered to enhance the safety of prescribing. However, it can have unintended consequences and new forms of prescribing error have been reported. Objective The aim of this study was to explore the causes and contributing factors associated with prescribing errors reported by multidisciplinary prescribers working within a CPOE system. Main Outcome Measure Multidisciplinary prescribers experience of prescribing errors in an CPOE system. Method This qualitative study was conducted in a hospital with a well-established CPOE system. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with prescribers from the professions of pharmacy, nursing, and medicine. Interviews analysed using a mixed inductive and deductive approach to develop a framework for the causes of error. Results Twenty-three prescribers were interviewed. Six main themes influencing prescribing were found: the system, the prescriber, the patient, the team, the task of prescribing and the work environment. Prominent issues related to CPOE included, incorrect drug name picking, default auto-population of dosages, alert fatigue and remote prescribing. These interacted within a complex prescribing environment. No substantial differences in the experience of CPOE were found between the professions. Conclusion Medical and non-medical prescribers have similar experiences of prescribing errors when using CPOE, aligned with existing published literature about medical prescribing. Causes of electronic prescribing errors are multifactorial in nature and prescribers describe how factors interact to create the conditions errors. While interventions should focus on direct CPOE issues, such as training and design, socio-technical, and environmental aspects of practice remain important.

Digital Health in Physicians' and Pharmacists' Office: A Comparative Study of e-Prescription Systems' Architecture and Digital Security in Eight Countries

e-Prescription systems are key components and drivers of digital health. They can enhance the safety of the patients, and are gaining popularity in health care systems around the world. Yet, there is little knowledge on comparative international analysis of e-Prescription systems' architecture and digital security. We report, in this study, original findings from a comparative analysis of the e-Prescription systems in eight different countries, namely, Canada, United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Spain, Japan, Sweden, and Denmark. We surveyed the databases related to pharmacies, eHealth, e-Prescriptions, and related digital health websites for each country, and their system architectures. We also compared the digital security and privacy protocols in place within and across these digital systems. We evaluated the systems' authentication protocols used by pharmacies to verify patients' identities during the medication dispensing process. Furthermore, we examined the supporting systems/services used to manage patients' medication histories and enhance patients' medication safety. Taken together, we report, in this study, original comparative findings on the limitations and challenges of the surveyed systems as well as in adopting e-Prescription systems. While the present study was conducted before the onset of COVID-19, e-Prescription systems have become highly relevant during the current pandemic and hence, a deeper understanding of the country systems' architecture and digital security that can help design effective strategies against the pandemic. e-Prescription systems can help reduce physical contact and the risk of exposure to the virus, as well as the wait times in pharmacies, thus enhancing patient safety and improving planetary health.

The Unmet Need for Pharmacists as Important Members of the Emergency Department Team in Resource-Limited Settings: A Case of Nepal

Background: The role of pharmacists in many developed countries has evolved from the traditional practice of dispensing medicines to contributing directly or indirectly to improve patient health outcomes. They are providing hospital services and patient care including services in the emergency department (ED). However, there is limited evidence for pharmacist involvement in the ED from resource-limited countries such as Nepal. Objective: The aim of this study is to discuss the role of pharmacists and highlight the unmet need of pharmacists in ED in Nepal. Methods: A narrative review of existing literature was conducted. Results: The status of ED services in Nepalese hospitals is not yet at a desirable level, and there is limited information about the role of pharmacists in EDs. Evidence obtained from developed nations on the role of pharmacists in EDs suggests that they help in improving patient outcomes by minimizing medication errors, adverse drug reactions, and enhance patient care. Conclusion: The study highlights the need for pharmacists in EDs in resource-limited settings. There is limited evidence of pharmacists' role in EDs from Nepal. Therefore, this study suggests a need for further studies on the possible contribution of pharmacists to ED services in Nepal.

Patients' knowledge about pharmacists, technicians, and physicians

PURPOSE

Including pharmacists within care teams can lead to positive health benefits, yet pharmacists remain underused. Misperceptions about pharmacists' duties and expertise compared to physicians' may contribute. This study sought to determine how well patients know the differences between pharmacists, technicians, and physicians regarding their duties and levels of education about medications. It also investigated how patients' perceptions affect their likelihood to initiate interactions with pharmacists, as well as reasons why they choose not to speak with pharmacists.

METHODS

An online survey of 477 U.S. adults was administered via Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Participants' knowledge of pharmacists', pharmacy technicians', and medical doctors' education and expertise were measured. Logistic regression determined whether patients' attitudes toward pharmacists predicted patient-pharmacist interactions. Participants' reasons for choosing to not talk to pharmacists about their medications were assessed via an open-ended response.

RESULTS

Patients generally know the duties pharmacists can perform compared to duties of technicians, but they incorrectly believe that physicians have more years of drug education than do pharmacists. Patients who have more positive attitudes toward pharmacists versus doctors are more likely to initiate interactions with pharmacists. Not seeing a need to interact, believing their doctors told them everything, or their ability to find information elsewhere (e.g., the Internet) were the 3 most cited reasons for not interacting with a pharmacist.

CONCLUSION

Reaching across disciplinary lines to colleagues in health communication may assist the pharmacy profession in finding ways to increase patients' knowledge and perceptions about the important role pharmacists can play, thereby increasing the likelihood of patients wanting to interact with pharmacists.

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.

Evaluation of Pharmacist Intervention on Discharge Medication Reconciliation

BACKGROUND

Discharge medication reconciliation (Discharge MedRec) was implemented on one unit at a large urban teaching hospital, and was to be expanded across the rest of the hospital and the health authority's various sites by the end of 2018. Clinical pharmacists on the Acute Care for the Elderly unit carried out discharge planning and led Discharge MedRec during a pilot period, to inform the future implementation.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to examine the number and type of medication discrepancies before and after implementation of Discharge MedRec. The secondary objectives were to compare documented medication changes, pharmacist recommendations, discharge counselling, communication with community pharmacists, polypharmacy, and 30-day readmission rates.

METHODS

Patients seen in December 2015 constituted the control (pre-implementation) group, who received usual care. Patients seen from January to April 2016 constituted the intervention group, for whom pharmacists performed Discharge MedRec and other discharge activities as per the hospital-to-home checklist of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices Canada.

RESULTS

There were 66 patients in the control group and 306 in the intervention group. Median discrepancies per patient decreased from 6.5 to 3 (p = 0.007), median number of documented changes without rationale increased from 2 to 3 (p = 0.01), and median number of documented changes with rationale increased from 1 to 2 (p < 0.001). Pharmacists made a per-patient median of 1 progress note recommendation in the control group and 2 progress note recommendations in the intervention group (p = 0.007), and a per-patient median of 2 orders in both the control and intervention groups (p = 0.62). Median recommendation acceptance was 100% for both groups, but twice as many recommendations were made per patient for the intervention group. Discharge counselling increased from 22.7% to 65%. Communication with community pharmacists increased from 10.6% to 60.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical pharmacist involvement improved Discharge MedRec planning and documentation. Decreases in medication discrepancies, combined with an increase in discharge counselling, should improve continuity of care across the health care team and increase patient adherence with medication therapy. This study further demonstrates the leadership role that pharmacists play in the assessment and clear documentation of medication changes at all transitions of care.

Evaluation of the impact of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation intervention: a single centre pre-post study from Ethiopia

Background The role of pharmacists in medication reconciliation (MedRec) is highly acknowledged in many developed nations. However, the impact of this strategy has not been well researched in low-and-middle-income countries, including Ethiopia. Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of pharmacist-led MedRec intervention on the incidence of unintentional medication discrepancies in Ethiopia. Setting Emergency department in a tertiary care teaching hospital in Ethiopia. Method A single centre, prospective, pre-post study was conducted on adults (aged 18 years or over) that had been hospitalized for at least 24 h and were taking at least 2 home medications on admission. The intervention involved assignment of a pharmacist to an emergency care team so as to take the best possible medication history and reconcile this list with the current medications in use. Main outcome measure Incidence and potential clinical severity of unintentional medication discrepancies. Results 123 patients were included (pre-intervention, 49; post-intervention, 74). The proportion of patients with at least one unintended discrepancy was reduced from 59 to 10.5% after the intervention (p < 0.001). Similarly, the percentage of patients with potentially severe clinical impact medication discrepancies reduced significantly after the intervention (p < 0.01). Most importantly, the likelihood of occurrence of unintentional medication discrepancies was approximately 17 times more often in the absence of pharmacist intervention (OR 16.45, 95% CI 5.22, 51.85). Conclusion This study has found that pharmacist-led MedRec intervention was impactful, and it was able to minimize the incidence of unintentional medication discrepancies significantly.

Defining and identifying concepts of medication reconciliation: An international pharmacy perspective

BACKGROUND

Medication discrepancies occur in up to 80% of hospitalized patients during transitions of care, either at admission or discharge. However, numerous organization have different definitions of medication reconciliation which may result in variations of services being implemented.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a consensus definition of medication reconciliation and define the essential components of medication reconciliation based on international consensus using a modified Delphi process.

METHODS

Statements and definitions about medication reconciliation found in the literature were used to build a Delphi Questionnaire and sent to experts around the world. Experts were identified based on their leadership in publication, education, professional interest and participation in the area of medication management. Delphi rounds continued until an 80% agreement was achieved.

RESULTS

In total, 24 experts were included in the Delphi panel. Three Delphi rounds were required to reach consensus on the key concepts included in a medication reconciliation. These concepts included 65 statements classified under (1) tasks involved, (2) who can conduct them, (3) when they should be conducted, (4) who should receive them, (5) how should it be measured and (6) clarifying the difference between medication reconciliation and medication review. This led to a proposed definition for medication reconciliation tasks as "the process of creating the most accurate list possible of all medications a patient is taking and comparing that list against the prescriber's orders. In addition, the patient's allergies, history of side effects from medications and medication aids are listed with the goal of providing correct medication to the patient at all transition points within the health care system."

CONCLUSION

An international expert panel was able to receive consensus on the definition of tasks involved in medication reconciliation and its essential concepts after four Delphi rounds. This definition is broader in scope than previous definitions.

Longitudinal qualitative evaluation of pharmacist integration into the urgent care setting

Purpose

To describe the most effective model for managing, educating, and training pharmacist advanced clinical practitioners (ACPs) in the urgent care center (UCC) setting, role evolution and how to measure their effectiveness.

Participants and methods

Ethical approval was obtained to perform a qualitative longitudinal cohort study in three sites, with three pharmacists in each trained as ACPs from 2016 to 2017. ACP role, location, management, mentorship, and supervision were locally determined. ACPs attended focus groups (FGs) at 1 and 3 months (sites 1–3), 6 and 12 months (site 1 only), and the UCC staff were interviewed once with a topic guide regarding training, integration, role, and impact. Verbatim transcriptions were analyzed thematically.

Results

Eight ACP FGs and 24 stakeholder interviews produced major themes of communication, management, education and training, role, and outcomes. Effective education, training, and integration required communication of role to address concerns regarding salary differentials, supportive management structure, and multi-professional learning. ACPs reported that the model of workplace training, experiential learning, and university-based education was appropriate. Training was better located in the minor injuries and general practitioner areas. Recommended measures of effectiveness included patient satisfaction and workload transfer.

Conclusion

The education and training model was appropriate. Communication and management require careful consideration to ensure effective integration and role development. Pharmacists were better located initially in the minor illness rather than major trauma areas. Quality of patient experience resulting from the new role was important in addition to reassurance that the role represented a positive contribution to workload.

Quality of Best Possible Medication History upon Admission to Hospital: Comparison of Nurses and Pharmacy Students and Consideration of National Quality Indicators

BACKGROUND

Medication reconciliation at transitions of care increases patient safety. Collection of an accurate best possible medication history (BPMH) on admission is a key step. National quality indicators are used as surrogate markers for BPMH quality, but no literature on their accuracy exists. Obtaining a high-quality BPMH is often labour- and resource-intensive. Pharmacy students are now being assigned to obtain BPMHs, as a cost-effective means to increase BPMH completion, despite limited information to support the quality of BPMHs obtained by students relative to other health care professionals.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the national quality indicator of using more than one source to complete a BPMH is a true marker of quality and to assess whether BPMHs obtained by pharmacy students were of quality equal to those obtained by nurses.

METHODS

This prospective trial compared BPMHs for the same group of patients collected by nurses and by trained pharmacy students in the emergency departments of 2 sites within a large health network over a 2-month period (July and August 2016). Discrepancies between the 2 versions were identified by a pharmacist, who determined which party (nurse, pharmacy student, or both) had made an error. A panel of experts reviewed the errors and ranked their severity.

RESULTS

BPMHs were prepared for a total of 40 patients. Those prepared by nurses were more likely to contain an error than those prepared by pharmacy students (171 versus 43 errors, p = 0.006). There was a nonsignificant trend toward less severe errors in BPMHs completed by pharmacy students. There was no significant difference in the mean number of errors in relation to the specified quality indicator (mean of 2.7 errors for BPMHs prepared from 1 source versus 4.8 errors for BPMHs prepared from ≥ 2 sources, p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

The surrogate marker (number of BPMH sources) may not reflect BPMH quality. However, it appears that BPMHs prepared by pharmacy students had fewer errors and were of similar quality (in terms of clinically significant errors) relative to those prepared by nurses.

Predictive factors for clinically significant pharmacist interventions at hospital admission

Pharmaceutical care activities at hospital admission have a significant impact on patient safety. The objective of this study was to identify predictive factors for clinically significant pharmacist interventions (PIs) performed during medication reconciliation and medication review at patient hospital admission.A 4-week prospective study was conducted in 4 medicine wards. At hospital admission, medication reconciliation and medication review were conducted and PIs were performed by the pharmaceutical team. The clinical impact of PIs was determined using the clinical economic and organizational (CLEO) tool. Clinical characteristics, laboratory results, and medication data for each patient were collected and analyzed as potential predictive factors of clinically significant PIs. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression were subsequently used to identify independent predictive factors for clinically relevant PIs.Among 265 patients admitted, 150 patients were included. Among 170 PIs performed at hospital admission, 71 were related to unintentional discrepancies (41.8%) during medication reconciliation, and 99 were related to drug-related problems (DRPs) (58.8%) during medication review. Overall, 115 PIs (67.7%) were considered to have a clinical impact. By multivariate analysis, number of medications ≥5 (P = .01) based on the best possible medication history, and Charlson comorbidity index score ≥2 (P < .01) were found to be independent predictive factors of clinically significant PIs at hospital admission.Identifying predictive factors of clinically significant PIs is valuable to optimize clinical pharmacist practices at hospital admission during both medication reconciliation and medication review. These 2 steps of the pharmaceutical care process improve medication safety at hospital admission.

Improving communication of medication changes using a pharmacist-prepared discharge medication management summary

Background Discontinuity of care between hospital and primary care is often due to poor information transfer. Medication information in medical discharge summaries (DS) is often incomplete or incorrect. The effectiveness and feasibility of hospital pharmacists communicating medication information, including changes made in the hospital, is not clearly defined. Objective To explore the impact of a pharmacist-prepared Discharge Medication Management Summary (DMMS) on the accuracy of information about medication changes provided to patients' general practitioners (GPs). Setting Two medical wards at a major metropolitan hospital in Australia. Method An intervention was developed in which ward pharmacists communicated medication change information to GPs using the DMMS. Retrospective audits were conducted at baseline and after implementation of the DMMS to compare the accuracy of information provided by doctors and pharmacists. GPs' satisfaction with the DMMS was assessed through a faxed survey. Main outcome measure Accuracy of medication change information communicated to GPs; GP satisfaction and feasibility of a pharmacist-prepared DMMS. Results At baseline, 263/573 (45.9%) medication changes were documented by doctors in the DS. In the post-intervention audit, more medication changes were documented in the pharmacist-prepared DMMS compared to the doctor-prepared DS (72.8% vs. 31.5%; p < 0.001). Most GPs (73.3%) were satisfied with the information provided and wanted to receive the DMMS in the future. Completing the DMMS took pharmacists an average of 11.7 minutes. Conclusion The accuracy of medication information transferred upon discharge can be improved by expanding the role of hospital pharmacists to include documenting medication changes.

A Medical Resident-Pharmacist Collaboration Improves the Rate of Medication Reconciliation Verification at Discharge

BACKGROUND

At the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia), it is standard practice to perform medication reconciliation at patient discharge. Although pharmacists historically were available to assist resident physicians in the discharge medication reconciliation process, the process was never standardized. An internal review showed a 60%-70% rate of pharmacist review of discharge medication lists, potentially enabling medication errors to go unnoticed during transitions of care. In response, a medical resident- and pharmacist-led collaboration was designed, and a pre-post-intervention study was conducted to assess its effectiveness.

METHODS

A new work flow was established in which house staff notified pharmacists when a preliminary discharge medication list was ready for reconciliation and provided access for pharmacists to correct medication errors in the electronic discharge document with physician approval. Length of stay, average time of day of patient discharge, and readmission data were compared in the pre- and post-intervention periods.

RESULTS

There were 981 discharges in the preintervention period and 1,207 in the postintervention period. The rate of pharmacist reconciliation increased from 64.0% to 82.4% after the intervention (p<.0001). The average number of errors identified and corrected by pharmacists decreased from 0.979 to 0.862 per discharge (p<.0001). There was no significant change in readmission rates or time of discharge after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Redesigning the discharge medication reconciliation process in a teaching hospital to include a review of medical resident discharge medication lists by pharmacists provided more opportunities for discharge medication error identification and correction.

Comparison of a Pharmacist-Performed and Physician or Advanced Practice Provider–Performed Medication History in Pediatric Patients

Background: In the adult population, a high rate of discrepancies exists between provider-performed and pharmacist-performed medication histories. Limited data exist regarding pharmacist-performed medication histories in hospitalized pediatric patients. Objective: Identify the incidence and severity of discrepancies in medication histories performed by practitioners compared with pharmacists in the pediatric population. Methods: After institutional review board approval, a retrospective analysis of pediatric patients admitted to inpatient pediatric units in a tertiary hospital was performed. The primary endpoint of the study was the percentage of provider-performed medication histories with any discrepancies compared with the pharmacist-performed medication history. Secondary endpoints included the number and type of discrepancies and the discrepancy’s potential risk of patient harm. Results: A total of 101 subjects were included. Nineteen patients (18.8%) had at least one medication discrepancy. Missing medications accounted for the majority of the discrepancies. Advance practice providers performed a small number of the initial medication histories (5%) and had at least one discrepancy for each history performed. The percentages of Grades 1, 2, and 3 discrepancies were 57.2%, 17.1%, and 25.7%, respectively. Medications with the most frequent discrepancies included anticonvulsants, antihistamines, and histamine receptor antagonists. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and lower than expected discrepancy rate. Conclusion: In this study, 18.8% of pediatric patients had a discrepancy between medication histories. Missing medications accounted for the largest amount of discrepancies. A large percentage of discrepancies had the potential to cause patient harm.

Survey of Emergency Medicine Pharmacy Education Opportunities for Students and Residents

BACKGROUND

Pharmacy services in the emergency department (ED) have been shown to decrease medication adverse events and improve patient outcomes. Anecdotally, there has been expansion of emergency medicine (EM) educational opportunities for pharmacy students and postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) pharmacy residents, however the extent of this expansion is currently unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this survey study is to determine the prevalence and nature of EM pharmacy training available to pharmacy students and residents.

METHODS

Electronic surveys were distributed to chairs of departments of pharmacy practice and experiential education representatives at Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education-accredited colleges or schools of pharmacy as well as residency program directors at American Society of Health-System Pharmacists-accredited postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) programs. Questions were asked related to demographics, EM introductory or advanced pharmacy practice experiences (IPPE or APPE), and PGY1 and non-EM postgraduate year 2 (PGY2) rotations. Five reminder e-mails and weekly and grand prize drawings were offered. Data that were gathered are presented utilizing descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Overall, 57/110 (52%) colleges or schools of pharmacy representatives and 286/831 (34%) residency program representatives completed the survey. Colleges or schools of pharmacy reported EM IPPEs and APPEs at 12/57 (21.1%) and 44/53 (83%), respectively. EM pharmacy rotations were available for PGY1 and non-EM PGY2 residents at 212/286 (74.1%) and 83/157 (52.9%) of institutions, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Survey results represent the prevalence and characteristics of EM-related education opportunities for pharmacy students and residents.

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.

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.

Partnered medication review and charting between the pharmacist and medical officer in the Emergency Short Stay and General Medicine Unit

OBJECTIVE

A partnered medication review and charting model involving a pharmacist and medical officer was implemented in the Emergency Short Stay Unit and General Medicine Unit of a major tertiary hospital. The aim of the study was to describe the safety and effectiveness of partnered medication charting in this setting.

METHODS

A partnered medication review and charting model was developed. Credentialed pharmacists charted pre-admission medications and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in collaboration with the admitting medical officer. The pharmacist subsequently had a clinical discussion with the treating nurse regarding the medication management plan for the patient. A prospective audit was undertaken of all patients from the initiation of the service.

RESULTS

A total of 549 patients had medications charted by a pharmacist from the 14th of November 2012 to the 30th of April 2013. A total of 4765 medications were charted by pharmacists with 7 identified errors, corresponding to an error rate of 1.47 per 1000 medications charted.

CONCLUSIONS

Partnered medication review and charting by a pharmacist in the Emergency Short Stay and General Medicine unit is achievable, safe and effective. Benefits from the model extend beyond the pharmacist charting the medications, with clinical value added to the admission process through early collaboration with the medical officer. Further research is required to provide evidence to further support this collaborative model.

What Can a Urine Drug Screening Immunoassay Really Tell Us?

Urine drug screening has become standard of care in many medical practice settings to assess compliance, detect misuse, and/or to provide basis for medical or legal action. The antibody-based enzymatic immunoassays used for qualitative analysis of urine have significant drawbacks that clinicians are often not aware of. Recent literature suggests that there is a lack of understanding of the shortcomings of these assays by clinicians who are ordering and/or interpreting them. This article addresses the state of each of the individual immunoassays that are most commonly used today in order to help the reader become proficient in the interpretation and application of the results. Some literature already exists regarding sources of "false positives" and "false negatives," but none seem to present the material with the practicing clinician in mind. This review aims to avoid overwhelming the reader with structures and analytical chemistry. The reader will be presented relevant clinical knowledge that will facilitate appropriate interpretation of immunoassays regardless of practice settings. Using this review as a learning tool and a reference, clinicians will be able to interpret the results of commonly used immunoassays in an evidence-based, informed manner and minimize the negative impact that misinterpretation has on patient care.

A quantitative evaluation of medication histories and reconciliation by discipline

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Medication reconciliation at transitions of care decreases medication errors, hospitalizations, and adverse drug events. We compared inpatient medication histories and reconciliation across disciplines and evaluated the nature of discrepancies.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of patients admitted from the emergency department at our 760-bed hospital. Eligible patients had their medication histories conducted and reconciled in order by the admitting nurse (RN), certified pharmacy technician (CPhT), and pharmacist (RPh). Discharge medication reconciliation was not altered. Admission and discharge discrepancies were categorized by discipline, error type, and drug class and were assigned a criticality index score. A discrepancy rating system systematically measured discrepancies.

RESULTS

Of 175 consented patients, 153 were evaluated. Total admission and discharge discrepancies were 1,461 and 369, respectively. The average number of medications per participant at admission was 8.59 (1,314) with 9.41 (1,374) at discharge. Most discrepancies were committed by RNs: 53.2% (777) at admission and 56.1% (207) at discharge. The majority were omitted or incorrect. RNs had significantly higher admission discrepancy rates per medication (0.59) compared with CPhTs (0.36) and RPhs (0.16) (P < .001). RPhs corrected significantly more discrepancies per participant than RNs (6.39 vs 0.48; P < .001); average criticality index reduction was 79.0%. Estimated prevented adverse drug events (pADEs) cost savings were $589,744.

CONCLUSIONS

RPhs committed the fewest discrepancies compared with RNs and CPhTs, resulting in more accurate medication histories and reconciliation. RPh involvement also prevented the greatest number of medication errors, contributing to considerable pADE-related cost savings.

The difference in pharmacists' interventions across the diverse settings in a children's hospital

AIMS

This study aimed to document and compare the nature of clinical pharmacists' interventions made in different practice settings within a children's hospital.

METHODS

The primary investigator observed and documented all clinical interventions performed by clinical pharmacists for between 35-37 days on each of the five study wards from the three practice settings, namely general medical, general surgical and hematology-oncology. The rates, types and significance of the pharmacists' interventions in the different settings were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 982 interventions were documented, related to the 16,700 medication orders reviewed on the five wards in the three practice settings over the duration of the study. Taking medication histories and/or patient counselling were the most common pharmacists' interventions in the general settings; constituting more than half of all interventions. On the Hematology-Oncology Ward the pattern was different with drug therapy changes being the most common interventions (n = 73/195, 37.4% of all interventions). Active interventions (pharmacists' activities leading to a change in drug therapy) constituted less than a quarter of all interventions on the general medical and surgical wards compared to nearly half on the specialty Hematology-Oncology Ward. The majority (n = 37/42, 88.1%) of a random sample of the active interventions reviewed were rated as clinically significant. Dose adjustment was the most frequent active interventions in the general settings, whilst drug addition constituted the most common active interventions on the Hematology-Oncology Ward. The degree of acceptance of pharmacists' active interventions by prescribers was high (n = 223/244, 91.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of pharmacists' active interventions differed across different practice settings, being most frequent in the specialty hematology-oncology setting. The nature and type of the interventions documented in the hematology-oncology were also different compared to those in the general medical and surgical settings.