Methods for evaluating adverse drug event preventability in emergency department patients

Improving medication prescribing-related outcomes for vulnerable elderly in transitions on high-risk medications (IMPROVE-IT HRM): a pilot randomized trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Seniors with recurrent hospitalizations who are taking multiple medications including high-risk medications are at particular risk for serious adverse medication events. We will assess whether an expert Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (CPT) medication management intervention during hospitalization with follow-up post-discharge and communication with circle of care is feasible and can decrease drug therapy problems amongst this group.

METHODS

The design is a pragmatic pilot randomized trial with 1:1 patient-level concealed randomization with blinded outcome assessment and data analysis. Participants will be adults 65 years and older admitted to internal medicine services for more than 2 days, who have had at least one other hospitalization in the prior year, taking five or more chronic medications including at least one high-risk medication. The CPT intervention identifies medication targets; completes consult, including priorities for improving prescribing negotiated with the patient; starts the care plan; ensures a detailed discharge medication reconciliation and circle-of-care communication; and sees the patient at least twice after hospital discharge via virtual visits to consolidate the care plan in the community. Control group receives usual care. Primary outcomes are feasibility - recruitment, retention, costs, and clinical - number of drug therapy problems improved, with secondary outcomes examining coordination of transitions in care, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs. Follow-up is to 3-month posthospital discharge.

DISCUSSION

If results support feasibility of ramp-up and promising clinical outcomes, a follow-up definitive trial will be organized using a developing national platform and medication appropriateness network. Since the intervention allows a very scarce medical specialty expertise to be offered via virtual care, there is potential to improve the safety, outcomes, and cost of care widely.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04077281.

Characterizing and Comparing Adverse Drug Events Documented in 2 Spontaneous Reporting Systems in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, Canada: Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Robust adverse drug event (ADE) reporting systems are crucial to monitor and identify drug safety signals, but the quantity and type of ADEs captured may vary by system characteristics.

OBJECTIVE

We compared ADEs reported in 2 different reporting systems in the same jurisdictions, the Patient Safety and Learning System-Adverse Drug Reaction (PSLS-ADR) and ActionADE, to understand report variation.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study analyzed reports entered into PSLS-ADR and ActionADE systems between December 1, 2019, and December 31, 2022. We conducted a comprehensive analysis including all events from both reporting systems to examine coverage and usage and understand the types of events captured in both systems. We calculated descriptive statistics for reporting facility type, patient demographics, serious events, and most reported drugs. We conducted a subanalysis focused on adverse drug reactions to enable direct comparisons between systems in terms of the volume and events reported. We stratified results by reporting system.

RESULTS

We performed the comprehensive analysis on 3248 ADE reports, of which 12.4% (375/3035) were reported in PSLS-ADR and 87.6% (2660/3035) were reported in ActionADE. Distribution of all events and serious events varied slightly between the 2 systems. Iohexol, gadobutrol, and empagliflozin were the most common culprit drugs (173/375, 46.2%) in PSLS-ADR, while hydrochlorothiazide, apixaban, and ramipril (308/2660, 11.6%) were common in ActionADE. We included 2728 reports in the subanalysis of adverse drug reactions, of which 12.9% (353/2728) were reported in PSLS-ADR and 86.4% (2357/2728) were reported in ActionADE. ActionADE captured 4- to 6-fold more comparable events than PSLS-ADR over this study's period.

CONCLUSIONS

User-friendly and robust reporting systems are vital for pharmacovigilance and patient safety. This study highlights substantial differences in ADE data that were generated by different reporting systems. Understanding system factors that lead to varying reporting patterns can enhance ADE monitoring and should be taken into account when evaluating drug safety signals.

unDerstandIng the cauSes of mediCation errOrs and adVerse drug evEnts for patients with mental illness in community caRe (DISCOVER): a qualitative study

Background

It is estimated that 237 million medication errors occur in England each year with a significant number occurring in the community. Our understanding of the causes of preventable medication errors and adverse drug events (ADE) affecting patients with mental illness is limited in this setting. Better understanding of the factors that contribute to errors can support the development of theory-driven improvement interventions.

Methods

Remote qualitative semi-structured interviews with 26 community-based healthcare professionals in England and Wales were undertaken between June-November 2022. Recruitment was undertaken using purposive sampling via professional networks. Interviews were guided by the critical incident technique and analysed using the framework method. Any data that involved speculation was not included in the analysis. Independent analysis was carried out by the research team to extract themes guided by the London Protocol.

Results

A total of 43 medication errors and 12 preventable ADEs were discussed, with two ADEs having an unknown error origin. Prescribing errors were discussed most commonly (n = 24), followed by monitoring errors (n = 8). Six contributory factor themes were identified: the individual (staff); the work environment; the teams/interfaces; the organisation and management; the patient; and the task and technology. The individual (staff) factors were involved in just over 80% of all errors discussed. Participants reported a lack of knowledge regarding psychotropic medication and mental illnesses which accompanied diffusion of responsibility. There were difficulties with team communication, particularly across care interfaces, such as ambiguity/brevity of information being communicated and uncertainty concerning roles which created confusion amongst staff. Unique patient social/behavioural contributory factors were identified such as presenting with challenging behaviour and complex lifestyles, which caused difficulties attending appointments as well as affecting overall clinical management.

Conclusion

These findings highlight that the causes of errors are multifactorial with some unique to this patient group. Key areas to target for improvement include the education/training of healthcare professionals regarding neuropharmacology/mental illnesses and enhancing communication across care interfaces. Future research should explore patient perspectives regarding this topic to help develop a holistic picture. These findings can be used to guide future intervention research to ameliorate medication safety challenges for this patient group.

Adverse drug reactions in hospitals: population estimates for Portugal and the ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM crosswalk

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADR), both preventable and non-preventable, are frequent and pose a significant burden. This study aimed to produce up-to-date estimates for ADR rates in hospitals, in Portugal, from 2010 to 2018. In addition, it explores possible pitfalls when crosswalking between ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM code sets for ADR identification.

METHODS

The Portuguese Hospital Morbidity Database was used to identify hospital episodes (outpatient or inpatient) with at least one ICD code of ADR. Since the study period spanned from 2010 to 2018, both ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes based on previously published studies were used to define episodes. This was an exploratory study, and descriptive statistics were used to provide ADR rates and summarise episode features for the full period (2010-2018) as well as for the ICD-9-CM (2010-2016) and ICD -10-CM (2017-2018) eras.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2018, ADR occurred in 162,985 hospital episodes, corresponding to 1.00% of the total number of episodes during the same period. Higher rates were seen in the oldest age groups. In the same period, the mean annual rate of episodes related to ADR was 174.2/100,000 population. The episode rate (per 100,000 population) was generally higher in males, except in young adults (aged '15-20', '25-30' and '30-35' years), although the overall frequency of ADR in hospital episodes was higher in females.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the ICD-10-CM transition, administrative health data in Portugal remain a feasible source for producing up-to-date estimates on ADR in hospitals. There is a need for future research to identify target recipients for preventive interventions and improve medication safety practices in Portugal.

An Empirical Comparative Assessment of Inter-Rater Agreement of Binary Outcomes and Multiple Raters

Background: Many methods under the umbrella of inter-rater agreement (IRA) have been proposed to evaluate how well two or more medical experts agree on a set of outcomes. The objective of this work was to assess key IRA statistics in the context of multiple raters with binary outcomes. Methods: We simulated the responses of several raters (2–5) with 20, 50, 300, and 500 observations. For each combination of raters and observations, we estimated the expected value and variance of four commonly used inter-rater agreement statistics (Fleiss’ Kappa, Light’s Kappa, Conger’s Kappa, and Gwet’s AC1). Results: In the case of equal outcome prevalence (symmetric), the estimated expected values of all four statistics were equal. In the asymmetric case, only the estimated expected values of the three Kappa statistics were equal. In the symmetric case, Fleiss’ Kappa yielded a higher estimated variance than the other three statistics. In the asymmetric case, Gwet’s AC1 yielded a lower estimated variance than the three Kappa statistics for each scenario. Conclusion: Since the population-level prevalence of a set of outcomes may not be known a priori, Gwet’s AC1 statistic should be favored over the three Kappa statistics. For meaningful direct comparisons between IRA measures, transformations between statistics should be conducted.

Adverse Events After Transition From ICU to Hospital Ward: A Multicenter Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

To examine adverse events and associated factors and outcomes during transition from ICU to hospital ward (after ICU discharge).

DESIGN

Multicenter cohort study.

SETTING

Ten adult medical-surgical Canadian ICUs.

PATIENTS

Patients were those admitted to one of the 10 ICUs from July 2014 to January 2016.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Two ICU physicians independently reviewed progress and consultation notes documented in the medical record within 7 days of patient's ICU discharge date to identify and classify adverse events. The adverse event data were linked to patient characteristics and ICU and ward physician surveys collected during the larger prospective cohort study. Analyses were conducted using multivariable logistic regression. Of the 451 patients included in the study, 84 (19%) experienced an adverse event, the majority (62%) within 3 days of transfer from ICU to hospital ward. Most adverse events resulted only in symptoms (77%) and 36% were judged to be preventable. Patients with adverse events were more likely to be readmitted to the ICU (odds ratio, 5.5; 95% CI, 2.4-13.0), have a longer hospital stay (mean difference, 16.1 d; 95% CI, 8.4-23.7) or die in hospital (odds ratio, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.8-11.8) than those without an adverse event. ICU and ward physician predictions at the time of ICU discharge had low sensitivity and specificity for predicting adverse events, ICU readmissions, and hospital death.

CONCLUSIONS

Adverse events are common after ICU discharge to hospital ward and are associated with ICU readmission, increased hospital length of stay and death and are not predicted by ICU or ward physicians.

Inter-rater reliability of assessments regarding the quality of drug treatment, and drug-related hospital admissions

AIMS

To investigate inter-rater agreement on the quality of drug treatment, and the relationship between the drug treatment and hospital admission.

METHODS

Three specialist physicians and two resident physicians determined, independently and in consensus, the quality of drug treatment from an overall medical perspective, and its association with admission, in 30 randomly selected patients (50% female, median age 72 years) admitted to Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden, in April 2018. The inter-rater agreement was evaluated with Gwet's agreement coefficient (AC₁ ).

RESULTS

In all, 200 (95%) out of 210 drugs at admission and 238 (97%) out of 245 drugs at discharge were assessed as reasonable drug treatment by all assessors. Conversely, none of the drugs at admission, and two at discharge, were assessed as unreasonable drug treatment by all assessors (AC₁ : 0.88 and 0.94 [all], 0.86 and 0.95 [specialists], 0.92 and 0.92 [residents], respectively). The assessments regarding the association between the drug treatment and the hospital admission (not related or main/contributory reason) were consistent between the assessors for 16 out of 30 patients (AC₁ : 0.67 [all], 0.74 [specialists], 0.54 [residents]). In none of the three cases where the hospital admission was considered possibly attributable to a prescribing error did the assessors make consistent assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

As the inter-rater agreement ranged between weak and almost perfect, the reliability of assessments of drug treatment quality, as well as adverse consequences, appears to be a methodological concern. To yield acceptably reliable results regarding both drug treatment aspects at issue, specialist physicians should be involved.

Are there opportunities to improve care as patients transition through the cancer care continuum? A scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Transitions in Care (TiC) are vulnerable periods in care delivery associated with adverse events, increased cost and decreased patient satisfaction. Patients with cancer encounter many transitions during their care journey due to improved survival rates and the complexity of treatment. Collectively, improving TiC is particularly important among patients with cancer. The objective of this scoping review is to synthesise and map the existing literature regarding TiC among patients with cancer in order to explore opportunities to improve TiC among patients with cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This scoping review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-Scoping Review Extension and the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. The PubMed cancer filter and underlying search strategy will be tailored to each database (Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsycINFO) and combined with search terms for TiC. Grey literature and references of included studies will be searched. The search will include studies published from database inception until 9 February 2020. Quantitative and qualitative studies will be included if they describe transitions between any type of healthcare provider or institution among patients with cancer. Descriptive statistics will summarise study characteristics and quantitative data of included studies. Qualitative data will be synthesised using thematic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Our objective is to synthesise and map the existing evidence; therefore, ethical approval is not required. Evidence gaps around TiC will inform a programme of research aimed to improve high-risk transitions among patients with cancer. The findings of this scoping review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and widely presented at academic conferences. More importantly, decision makers and patients will be provided a summary of the findings, along with data from a companion study, to prioritise TiC in need of interventions to improve continuity of care for patients with cancer.

Incidence, preventability, and causality of adverse drug reactions at a university hospital emergency department

Purpose

To investigate the characteristics of ADRs in patients admitting at the emergency room of a tertiary hospital.

Methods

We collected the patient records of 1600 emergency room visits of a university hospital in 2018. The patient files were studied retrospectively and all possible ADRs were identified and registered. Patient characteristics, drugs associated with ADRs, causality, severity, preventability, and the role of pharmacogenetics were assessed.

Results

There were 125 cases with ADRs, resulting in a 7.8% overall incidence among emergency visits. The incidence was greatest in visits among elderly patients, reaching 14% (men) to 19% (women) in the 80–89 years age group. The most common causative drugs were warfarin, acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), apixaban, and docetaxel, and the most common ADRs were bleedings and neutropenia and/or severe infections. Only two of the cases might have been prevented by pharmacogenetic testing, as advised in Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines.

Conclusion

The same ATC classes, antithrombotics and cytostatics, were involved in ADRs causing university clinic hospitalizations as those identified previously in drug-related hospital fatalities. It seems difficult to prevent these events totally, as the treatments are vitally important and their risk-benefit-relationships have been considered thoroughly, and as pharmacogenetic testing could have been useful in only few cases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-020-03043-3.

Preventable adverse drug events: Descriptive epidemiology

AIM

Our objective was to identify preventable adverse drug events and factors contributing to their development.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review combining data from three prospective multicentre observational studies that assessed emergency department patients for adverse drug events. A clinical pharmacist and physician independently reviewed the charts, extracted data and rated the preventability of each adverse drug event. A third reviewer adjudicated all discordant or uncertain cases. We calculated the proportion of adverse drug events that were deemed preventable, performed multivariable logistic regression to explore the characteristics of patients with preventable events, and identified contributing factors.

RESULTS

We reviewed the records of 1 356 adverse drug events in 1 234 patients. Raters considered 869 (64.1%) of adverse drug events probably or definitely preventable. Patients with mental health diagnoses (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.3-2.5) and diabetes (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.2-2.4) were more likely to present with preventable events. The medications most commonly implicated in preventable events were warfarin (9.4%), hydrochlorothiazide (4.5%), furosemide (4.0%), insulin (3.9%) and acetylsalicylic acid (2.7%). Common contributing factors included inadequate patient instructions, monitoring and follow-up, and reassessments after medication changes had been made.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that patients with mental health conditions and diabetes require close monitoring. Efforts to address the identified contributing factors are needed.

Descriptive Epidemiology of Safety Events at an Academic Medical Center

Background: Adverse safety events in healthcare are of great concern, and despite an increasing focus on the prevention of error and harm mitigation, the epidemiology of safety events remains incomplete. Methods: We performed an analysis of all reported safety events in an academic medical center using a voluntary incident reporting surveillance system for patient safety. Safety events were classified as: serious (reached the patient and resulted in moderate to severe harm or death); precursor (reached the patient and resulted in minimal or no detectable harm); and near miss (did not reach the patient). Results: During a three-year period, there were 31,817 events reported. Most of the safety events were precursor safety events (reached the patient and resulted in minimal harm or no detectable harm), corresponding to 77.3%. Near misses accounted for 10.8%, and unsafe conditions for 11.8%. The number of reported serious safety events was low, accounting for only 0.1% of all safety events. Conclusions: The reports analysis of these events should lead to a better understanding of risks in patient care and ways to mitigate it.

Repeat adverse drug events associated with outpatient medications: a descriptive analysis of 3 observational studies in British Columbia, Canada

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug events are an important cause of preventable emergency department visits and hospital admissions. We examined repeat adverse drug events associated with outpatient medications resulting in acute care utilization.

METHODS

This descriptive analysis combined data from 3 prospective multicentre observational studies, in which clinical pharmacists and physicians independently evaluated patients who visited the emergency department for adverse drug events in 3 hospitals in British Columbia. During these studies, an independent committee adjudicated all discordant and uncertain cases using a standardized algorithm. For the current study, we retrospectively reviewed the medical and research records of all patients 19 years of age and older who had been diagnosed with an adverse drug event during the primary studies to determine the proportion of repeat events. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with repeat events; we adjusted for clustering at the hospital level for patient-level analyses and at the patient level for event-level analyses.

RESULTS

Among 12 977 patients, 1178 were diagnosed with 1296 adverse drug events at the point of care. Of these events, 32.5% (421 of 1296; 95% confidence interval [CI] 29.8%-35.1%) were repeat events, of which 75.3% (317 of 421; 95% CI 71.1%-79.5%) were deemed probably or definitely preventable as re-exposure to the culprit medication or repeat withdrawal of an indicated medication was inconsistent with best medical practice. Patients presenting with repeat events were more likely to have renal failure (odds ratio [OR] 2.01; 95% CI 1.32%-3.07%) or a mental health diagnosis (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.02%-1.88%).

INTERPRETATION

A high proportion of adverse drug events were repeat events, most of which were deemed preventable. Interventions to ensure that care providers are aware of previously diagnosed adverse drug events when prescribing or dispensing need to be developed and evaluated and may reduce unintentional re-exposures to previously harmful medications.

Characterization and preventability of adverse drug events as cause of emergency department visits: a prospective 1-year observational study

Background

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a significant cause of emergency department (ED) visits, with a major impact on healthcare resource utilization. A multicentre observational study, aimed to describe frequency, seriousness and preventability of ADEs reported in four EDs, was performed in Sicily (Italy) over a 1-year period.

Methods

Two trained monitors for each ED supported clinicians in identifying ADEs of patients admitted to EDs between June 1st, 2013 and May 31st, 2014 through a systematic interview of patients or their caregivers and with an additional record review. A research team analyzed each case of suspected ADE, to make a causality assessment applying the Naranjo algorithm and a preventability assessment using Schumock and Thornton criteria.

Absolute and percentage frequencies with 95% confidence interval (CI) and medians with interquartile ranges (IQR) were estimated. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate independent predictors of serious and certainly preventable ADEs.

Results

Out of 16,963 ED visits, 575 (3.4%) were associated to ADEs, of which 15.1% resulted in hospitalization. ADEs were classified as probable in 45.9%, possible in 51.7% and definite in 2.4% of the cases. Moreover, ADEs were considered certainly preventable in 12.3%, probably preventable in 58.4%, and not preventable in 29.2% of the cases. Polytherapy influenced the risk to experience a serious, as well as a certainly preventable ADE. Whilst, older age resulted an independent predictor only of serious events. The most common implicated drug classes were antibiotics (34.4%) and anti-inflammatory drugs (22.6%). ADEs due to psycholeptics and antiepileptics resulted preventable in 62.7 and 54.5% of the cases, respectively. Allergic reactions (64%) were the most frequent cause of ADE-related ED visits, followed by neurological effects (10.2%) that resulted preventable in 1.9 and 37.3% of the cases, respectively.

Conclusion

ADEs are a frequent cause of ED visits. The commonly used antibiotics and anti-inflammatory drugs should be carefully managed, as they are widely involved in mild to severe ADEs. Polytherapy is associated with the occurrence of serious, as well as certainly preventable ADEs, while older age only with serious events. A greater sensitivity to drug monitoring programs among health professionals is needed.