How a Patient Personalised Clinical Pharmacy Programme Can Secure Therapeutic Care in an Orthogeriatric Care Pathway (5P Project)?

Clinical impact of an individualised clinical pharmacy programme into the memory care pathway of older people: an observational study

BACKGROUND

In older patients, medication exposure [i.e. polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), medications with anticholinergic and/or sedative properties] is a modifiable risk factor associated with cognitive iatrogenic risk and dementia.

AIM

To assess the potential clinical impact of the implementation of an individualised clinical pharmacy programme at the initiation of the Memory care pathway in older patients with a cognitive complaint.

METHOD

This prospective observational study included older patients with high-risk of adverse drug event (HR) admitted in a French geriatric university hospital to explore the cognitive complaint or the cognitive disorder between January and November 2021. Drug-related problems (DRPs) were identified during a medication review performed in HR patients, and pharmaceutical interventions (PIs) notified in the patient's hospitalisation report were collected. The clinical impact of PIs was assessed by an expert panel (geriatricians and clinical pharmacists) using the Clinical, Economic, and Organisational (CLEO) tool.

RESULTS

Overall, 326 patients were eligible and 207 (63.5%) were considered as HR patients. Among HR patients, 88.9% (n = 184) were treated using at least 5 medications (polypharmacy), and 36.7% (n = 76) received at least one PIM with cognitive iatrogenic risk. During the medication review, 490 PIs were provided and their clinical impact was rated as minor for 57.3% (n = 281), moderate for 26.7% (n = 131), and major for 2.5% (n = 12).

CONCLUSION

The integration of clinical pharmacist secured the Memory care pathway of older patients with a cognitive complaint by identifying an important number of DRPs and PIMs with potential cognitive iatrogenic risk.

Clinical and economic impact of clinical oncology pharmacy in cancer patients receiving injectable anticancer treatments: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Clinical pharmacy can reduce drug-related iatrogenesis by improving the management of adverse effects of drugs, limiting drug-drug interactions, and improving patient adherence. Given the vulnerability of cancer patients and the toxicity of injectable anticancer drugs, clinical pharmacy service (CPS) could provide a significant clinical benefit in cancer care. This review aims to synthesize existing evidence on clinical pharmacy's impact on patients treated with intravenous anticancer drugs.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed in the PubMed/Medline database from January 2000 to December 2021, associating the keywords: clinical pharmacy, pharmaceutical care, pharmacist, oncology, and chemotherapy. To be eligible for inclusion, studies have to report clinical pharmaceutical services for patients treated with intravenous chemotherapy with a clinical and/or economic impact.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies met the selection criteria. Various CPS were reported: medication reconciliation, medication review, and pharmaceutical interview with patient. There was a lack of randomized study (n = 3; 7.3%). In one randomized controlled trial, pharmaceutical intervention significantly improved quality of life of patients receiving pharmaceutical care during injectable anticancer drugs courses. Economical results appear to show positive impact of clinical pharmacy with cost savings reported from 3112.87$ to 249 844€. Although most studies were non-comparative, they highlighted that clinical pharmacy tend to limit chemotherapy side effects and drug-related problems, improve quality of life and satisfaction of patients and healthcare professional, and a positive economic impact.

CONCLUSION

Clinical pharmacy can reduce adverse drug events in cancer patients. More robust and economic evaluations are still required to support its development in everyday practice.

Clinical pharmacist intervention to improve medication safety for hip fracture patients through secondary and primary care settings: a nonrandomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Hip fracture patients face a patient safety threat due to medication discrepancies and adverse drug reactions when they have a combination of high age, polypharmacy and several care transitions. Consequently, optimised pharmacotherapy through medication reviews and seamless communication of medication information between care settings is necessary. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the impact on medication management and pharmacotherapy. The secondary aim was to evaluate implementation of the novel Patient Pathway Pharmacist intervention for hip fracture patients.

METHODS

Hip fracture patients were included in this nonrandomised controlled trial, comparing a prospective intervention group (n = 58) with pre-intervention controls who received standard care (n = 50). The Patient Pathway Pharmacist intervention consisted of the steps: (A) medication reconciliation at admission to hospital, (B) medication review during hospitalisation, (C) recommendation for the medication information in the hospital discharge summary, (D) medication reconciliation at admission to rehabilitation, and (E) medication reconciliation and (F) review after hospital discharge. The primary outcome measure was quality score of the medication information in the discharge summary (range 0-14). Secondary outcomes were potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) at discharge, proportion receiving pharmacotherapy according to guidelines (e.g. prophylactic laxatives and osteoporosis pharmacotherapy), and all-cause readmission and mortality.

RESULTS

The quality score of the discharge summaries was significantly higher for the intervention patients (12.3 vs. 7.2, p < 0.001). The intervention group had significantly less PIMs at discharge (- 0.44 (95% confidence interval - 0.72, - 0.15), p = 0.003), and a higher proportion received prophylactic laxative (72 vs. 35%, p < 0.001) and osteoporosis pharmacotherapy (96 vs. 16%, p < 0.001). There were no differences in readmission or mortality 30 and 90 days post-discharge. The intervention steps were delivered to all patients (step A, B, E, F = 100% of patients), except step (C) medication information at discharge (86% of patients) and step (D) medication reconciliation at admission to rehabilitation (98% of patients).

CONCLUSION

The intervention steps were successfully implemented for hip fracture patients and contributed to patient safety through a higher quality medication information in the discharge summary, fewer PIMs and optimised pharmacotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03695081.

Implementation assessment of a patient personalized clinical pharmacy programme (5P project) into orthogeriatric care pathway

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The orthogeriatric path (hip-fractured elderly patients) is composed of several transition points (emergency surgery, orthopaedic, geriatric and rehabilitation units). The intervention of clinical pharmacists can ensure the continuity of patients' drug management during their hospital stay. The aim of the study was to assess the implementation of clinical pharmacy activities in an orthogeriatric pathway, regarding its impact on medication error prevention, the healthcare professionals' and patients' satisfaction, and the estimated associated pharmaceutical workload.

METHODS

Participants were aged 75 or older and managed for proximal femoral fracture. Their admission prescription was reviewed. If they were evaluated at high risk of adverse event (AE), medication reconciliation (MedRec) and pharmaceutical interviews (admission, discharge, and targeted on oral anticoagulant) were added at different steps of their care pathway. The achievement and duration of each clinical pharmacy activity were recorded. The number of pharmaceutical interventions (PI) made during prescription review, and unintentional discrepancies (UID) identified during MedRec were collected. A satisfaction questionnaire was sent to patients and healthcare professionals.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Among 455 included patients, 284 patients were considered at high risk of AE. Clinical pharmacy activity achievement rates varied between 12% and 98%. A total of 622 PI and 333 UID were identified. The overall patients' and healthcare professionals' satisfaction was rated from 63% to 100%. The total workload was estimated at 376 h: on average 16 min per prescription review, 43 min per admission MedRec, 26 min per discharge MedRec and 17 to 25 minutes per interview.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of the programme showed a high potential of drug management securing. To sustain it, additional pharmaceutical human resources and high-performance computing tools are needed.