Dataset Information

Impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation on admission to internal medicine service: experience in two tertiary care teaching hospitals.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Institute for Healthcare Improvement identifies medication reconciliation as the shared responsibility of nurses, pharmacists, and physicians, where each has a defined role. The study aims to assess the clinical impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation performed on day one of hospital admission to the internal medicine service.

Methods

This is a pilot prospective study conducted at two tertiary care teaching hospitals in Lebanon. Student pharmacists who were properly trained and closely supervised, collected the medication history, and pharmacists at the corresponding sites performed the reconciliation process. Interventions related to the unintended discrepancies were relayed to the medical team. The main outcome was the number of unintended discrepancies identified. The time needed for medication history, and the information sources used to complete the Best Possible Medication History were also assessed. The unintended discrepancies were classified by medication class and route of medication administration, by potential severity, and by proximal cause leading to the discrepancy. For the bivariate and multivariable analysis, the dependent variable was the incidence of unintended discrepancies. The "total number of unintended discrepancies" was dichotomized into yes (? 1 unintended discrepancy) or no (0 unintended discrepancies). Independent variables tested for their association with the dependent variable consisted of the following: gender, age, creatinine clearance, number of home medications, allergies, previous adverse drug reactions, and number of information sources used to obtain the BPMH. Results were assumed to be significant when p was ResultsDuring the study period, 204 patients were included, and 195 unintended discrepancies were identified. The most common discrepancies consisted of medication omission (71.8%), and the most common agents involved were dietary supplements (27.7%). Around 36% of the unintended discrepancies were judged as clinically significant, and only 1% were judged as serious. The most common interventions included the addition of a medication (71.8%) and the adjustment of a dose (12.8%). The number of home medications was significantly associated with the occurrence of unintended discrepancies (ORa?=?1.11 (1.03-1.19) p?=?0.007).

Conclusions

Pharmacy-led medication reconciliation upon admission, along with student pharmacist involvement and physician communication can reduce unintended discrepancies and improve medication safety and patient outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Karaoui LR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6636006 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation on admission to internal medicine service: experience in two tertiary care teaching hospitals.

Karaoui Lamis R LR Chamoun Nibal N Fakhir Jessica J Abi Ghanem Wael W Droubi Sarah S Diab Marzouk Abdul Rahman AR Droubi Nabila N Masri Hiba H Ramia Elsy E

BMC health services research 20190716 1

<h4>Background</h4>The Institute for Healthcare Improvement identifies medication reconciliation as the shared responsibility of nurses, pharmacists, and physicians, where each has a defined role. The study aims to assess the clinical impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation performed on day one of hospital admission to the internal medicine service.<h4>Methods</h4>This is a pilot prospective study conducted at two tertiary care teaching hospitals in Lebanon. Student pharmacists who were ...[more]

PMID: 31311537

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Medication reconciliation (MedRec) is a widely accepted tool for the identification and resolution of unintended medication discrepancies (UMD). Objective This study aimed at assessing the magnitude and associated factors of UMD identified through medication reconciliation upon patient admission to the internal medicine wards. Methods Prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the internal medicine wards of Felege Hiwot and Tibebe Ghion comprehensive specialized hospitals in Bahir Dar city, Northwest Ethiopia, from May 01 to July 30, 2021. Data were collected by using a data abstraction format prepared based on standard MedRec tools and previous studies on medication discrepancy. Pharmacists-led MedRec was made by following the WHO High5s “retroactive medication reconciliation model”. SPSS® (IBM Corporation) version 25.0 was used to analyze the data with descriptive and inferential statistics. A binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with UMD. A statistical significance was declared at a p-value < 0.05. Results Among 635 adult patients, 248 (39.1%) of them had at least one UMD. The most frequent types of UMDs were omission (41.75%) and wrong dose (21.9%). The majority (75.3%) of pharmacists’ interventions were accepted. Polypharmacy at admission (p-value < 0.001), age ≥ 65 (p-value = 0.001), a unit increase on the number of comorbidities (p-value = 0.008) and information sources used for MedRec (p-value < 0.001), and medium (p-value = 0.019) and low adherence (p-value < 0.001) were significantly associated with UMD. Conclusion The magnitude of UMD upon patient admission to the internal medicine wards was considerably high. Omission and the wrong dose of medication were common. Older age, polypharmacy, low and medium adherence, and an increase in the number of comorbidities and information sources used for MedRec are significantly associated with UMDs. Pharmacists' interventions were mostly acceptable. Thus, the implementation of pharmacists-led MedRec in the two hospitals is indispensable for patient safety. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08628-5.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Admission medication history (AMH) errors frequently cause medication order errors and patient harm. OBJECTIVE:To quantify AMH error reduction achieved when pharmacy staff obtain AMHs before admission medication orders (AMO) are placed. METHODS:This was a three-arm randomised controlled trial of 306 inpatients. In one intervention arm, pharmacists, and in the second intervention arm, pharmacy technicians, obtained initial AMHs prior to admission. They obtained and reconciled medication information from multiple sources. All arms, including the control arm, received usual AMH care, which included variation in several common processes. The primary outcome was severity-weighted mean AMH error score. To detect AMH errors, all patients received reference standard AMHs, which were compared with intervention and control group AMHs. AMH errors and resultant AMO errors were independently identified and rated by ?2 investigators as significant, serious or life threatening. Each error was assigned 1, 4 or 9 points, respectively, to calculate severity-weighted AMH and AMO error scores for each patient. RESULTS:Patient characteristics were similar across arms (mean±SD?age 72±16 years, number of medications 15±7). Analysis was limited to 278 patients (91%) with reference standard AMHs. Mean±SD AMH errors per patient in the usual care, pharmacist and technician arms were 8.0±5.6, 1.4±1.9?and 1.5±2.1, respectively (p<0.0001). Mean±SD?severity-weighted AMH error scores were 23.0±16.1, 4.1±6.8?and 4.1±7.0 per patient, respectively (p<0.0001). These AMH errors led to a mean±SD of 3.2±2.9, 0.6±1.1?and 0.6±1.1 AMO errors per patient, and mean severity-weighted AMO error scores of 6.9±7.2, 1.5±2.9?and 1.2±2.5 per patient, respectively (both p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS:Pharmacists and technicians reduced AMH errors and resultant AMO errors by over 80%. Future research should examine other sites and patient-centred outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02026453.

Project description:ObjectiveMedication reconciliation (MedRec) is a relevant safety procedure in medication management at transitions of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of MedRec, including a best possible medication history (BPMH) compared with a standard medication history in patients admitted to an internal medicine ward.DesignProspective interventional study. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics followed by univariate and multivariate Poisson regression models and a zero-inflated Poisson regression model.SettingInternal medicine ward in a secondary care hospital in Southern Switzerland.ParticipantsThe first 100 consecutive patients admitted in an internal medicine ward.Primary and secondary outcome measuresMedication discrepancies between the medication list obtained by the physician and that obtained by a pharmacist according to a systematic approach (BPMH) were collected, quantified and assessed by an expert panel that assigned a severity score. The same procedure was applied to discrepancies regarding allergies. Predicting factors for medication discrepancies were identified.ResultsThe median of medications per patient was 8 after standard medication history and 11 after BPMH. Total admission discrepancies were 524 (5.24 discrepancies per patient) with at least 1 discrepancy per patient. For 47 patients, at least one discrepancy was classified as clinically relevant. Discrepancies were classified as significant and serious in 19% and 2% of cases, respectively. Furthermore, 67% of the discrepancies were detected during the interview conducted by the pharmacist with the patients and/or their caregivers. The number of drugs used and the autonomous management of home therapy were associated with an increased number of clinically relevant discrepancies in a multivariable Poisson regression model.ConclusionEven in an advanced healthcare system, a standardised MedRec process including a BPMH represents an important strategy that may contribute to avoid a notable number of clinically relevant discrepancies and potential adverse drug events.

Project description:Background and aims: Medication usage varies according to prescribing behavior, professional recommendations, and the introduction of new drugs. Local surveillance of medication usage may be useful for understanding and comparing prescribing practices by healthcare providers, particularly in countries such as Australia that are in the process of enhancing nationwide data linkage programs. We sought to investigate the utility of electronic hospital admission data to investigate local trends in medication use, to determine similarities and differences with other Australian studies, and to identify areas for targeted interventions. Methods: We performed a retrospective longitudinal analysis using combined data from a hospital admissions administrative dataset from a large tertiary teaching hospital in Adelaide, South Australia and a hospital administrative database documenting medication usage matched for the same set of patients. All adult admissions over a 12-year period, between 1 January 2007 and 31st December 2018, were included in the study population. Medications were categorized into 21 pre-defined drug classes of interest according to the ATC code list 2021. Results: Of the 692,522 total admissions, 300,498 (43.4%) had at least one recorded medication. The overall mean number of medications for patients that were medicated increased steadily from a mean (SD) of 5.93 (4.04) in 2007 to 7.21 (4.98) in 2018. Results varied considerably between age groups, with the older groups increasing more rapidly. Increased medication usage was partly due to increased case-complexity with the mean (SD) Charlson comorbidity index increasing from 0.97 (1.66) in 2007-to-2012 to 1.17 (1.72) in 2013-to-2018 for medicated patients. Of the 21 medication classes, 15 increased (p < 0.005), including antithrombotic agents; OR = 1.18 [1.16-1.21], proton pump inhibitors; OR = 1.14 [1.12-1.17], statins; OR = 1.12; [1.09-1.14], and renin-angiotensin system agents; OR = 1.06 [1.04-1.08], whilst 3 decreased (p < 0.005) including anti-inflammatory drugs (OR = 0.55; 99.5% CI = 0.53-0.58), cardiac glycosides (OR = 0.81; 99.5% CI = 0.78-0.86) and opioids (OR = 0.82; 99.5% CI = 0.79-0.83). The mean number of medications for all admissions increased between 2007 and 2011 and then declined until 2018 for each age group, except for the 18-to-35-year-olds. Conclusion: Increased medication use occurred in most age groups between 2007 and 2011 before declining slightly even after accounting for increased comorbidity burden. The use of electronic hospital admission data can assist with monitoring local medication trends and the effects of initiatives to enhance the quality use of medicines in Australia.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough medication reconciliation (MedRec) is mandated and effective in decreasing preventable medication errors during transition of care, hospitals implement MedRec differently.ObjectiveQuantitatively compare the number and type of MedRec interventions between hospitals upon admission and discharge, followed by a qualitative analysis on potential reasons for differences.MethodsThis explanatory retrospective mixed-method study consisted of a quantitative and a qualitative part. Patients from six hospitals and six different wards i.e. orthopaedics, surgery, pulmonary diseases, internal medicine, cardiology and gastroenterology were included. At these wards, MedRec was implemented both on hospital admission and discharge. The number of pharmacy interventions was collected and classified in two subcategories. First, the number of interventions to resolve unintended discrepancies (elimination of differences between listed medication and the patient's actual medication use). And second, the number of medication optimizations (optimization of pharmacotherapy e.g. eliminating double medication). Based on these quantitative results and interviews, a focus group was performed to give insight in local MedRec processes to address differences in context between hospitals. Descriptive analysis (quantitative) and content analysis (qualitative) was used.ResultsOn admission 765 (85%) patients from six hospitals, received MedRec by trained nurses, pharmacy technicians, pharmaceutical consultants or pharmacists. Of those, 36-95% (mean per patient 2.2 (SD ± 2.4)) had at least one discrepancy. Upon discharge, these numbers were among 632 (70%) of patients, 5-28% (mean per patient 0.7 (SD 1.2)). Optimizations in pharmacotherapy were implemented for 2% (0.4-3.7 interventions per patient upon admission) to 95% (0.1-1.7 interventions per patient upon discharge) of patients. The main themes explaining differences in numbers of interventions were patient-mix, the type of healthcare professionals involved, where and when patient interviews for MedRec were performed and finally, embedding and extent of medication optimization.ConclusionsHospitals differed greatly in the number of interventions performed during MedRec. Differences in execution of MedRec and local context determines the number of interventions. This study can support hospitals who want to optimize MedRec processes.

Project description:BackgroundMedication reconciliation reduces potential medication discrepancies and adverse drug events. The role of pharmacy technicians in obtaining best possible medication histories (BPMHs) and performing reconciliation at the admission and transfer interfaces of care for pediatric patients has not been described.ObjectivesTo compare the completeness and accuracy of BPMHs and reconciliation conducted by a pharmacy technician (pilot study) and by nurses and/or pharmacists (baseline). The severity of identified unintentional discrepancies was rated to determine their clinical importance.MethodsThis prospective cohort comparison study involved patients up to 18 years of age admitted to and/or transferred between the Cardiology ward and the Cardiac Critical Care Unit of a pediatric tertiary care teaching hospital. A pharmacy resident conducted two 3-week audits: the first to assess the completeness and accuracy of BPMHs and reconciliation performed by nurses and/or pharmacists and the second to assess the completeness and accuracy of BPMHs and reconciliation performed by a pharmacy technician.ResultsThe total number of patients was 38 in the baseline phase and 46 in the pilot period. There were no statistically significant differences between the baseline and pilot audits in terms of completion of BPMH (82% [28/34] versus 78% [21/27], p = 0.75) or completion of reconciliation (70% [23/33] versus 75% [15/20], p = 0.76) within 24 h of admission. Completeness of transfer reconciliation was significantly higher during the pilot study than at baseline (91% [31/34] versus 61% [11/18], p = 0.022). No significant differences between the baseline and pilot audits were found in the proportions of patients with at least one BPMH discrepancy (38% [13/34] versus 22% [6/27], p = 0.27), at least one unintentional discrepancy upon admission (21% [7/33] versus 10% [2/20], p = 0.46), or at least one unintentional discrepancy at the transfer interface (6% [1/18] versus 3% [1/34], p = 0.58). None of the 16 unintentional discrepancies were rated as causing severe patient discomfort or clinical deterioration.ConclusionsA trained pharmacy technician can perform admission and transfer medication reconciliation for pediatric patients with completeness and accuracy comparable to those of nurses and pharmacists. Future studies should explore the sustainability and cost-effectiveness of this practice model.

Dataset Information

Impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation on admission to internal medicine service: experience in two tertiary care teaching hospitals.

Background

Methods

Conclusions

Publications

Impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation on admission to internal medicine service: experience in two tertiary care teaching hospitals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets