Dataset Information

An Integrated Model to Improve Medication Reconciliation in Oncology: Prospective Interventional Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Accurate medication reconciliation reduces the risk of drug incompatibilities and adverse events that can occur during transitions in care. Community pharmacies (CPs) are a crucial part of the health care system and could be involved in collecting essential information on conventional and supplementary drugs used at home.

Objective

The aim of this paper was to establish an alliance between our cancer institute, Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST), and CPs, the latter entrusted with the completion of a pharmacological recognition survey. We also aimed to integrate the national information technology (IT) platform of CPs with the electronic medical records of IRST.

Methods

Cancer patients undergoing antiblastic treatments were invited to select a CP taking part in the study and to complete the pharmacological recognition step. The information collected by the pharmacist was sent to the electronic medical records of IRST through the new IT platform, after which the oncologist performed the reconciliation process.

Results

A total of 66 CPs completed surveys for 134 patients. An average of 5.9 drugs per patient was used at home, with 12 or more used in the most advanced age groups. Moreover, 60% (80/134) of the patients used nonconventional products or critical foods. Some potential interactions between nonconventional medications and cancer treatments were reported.

Conclusions

In the PROF-1 (Progetto di Rete in Oncologia con le Farmacie di comunità della Romagna) study, an alliance was created between our cancer center and CPs to improve medication reconciliation, and a new integrated IT platform was validated.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04796142; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04796142.

SUBMITTER: Passardi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8726040 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:IntroductionMedication reconciliation, a technique that assists in aligning a care team's understanding of an individual's true medication regimen, is vital to optimize medication use and prevent medication errors. Historically, most medication reconciliation research has focused on institutional settings and transitional care, with comparatively little attention given to medication reconciliation in community settings. To optimize medication reconciliation for community-dwelling older adults, healthcare professionals and older adults must be engaged in co-designing processes that create sustainable approaches.MethodsAcademic researchers, older adults, and community- and health system-based healthcare professionals engaged in a participatory process to better understand medication reconciliation barriers and co-design solutions. The initiative consisted of two participatory research approaches: (1) Sparks Innovation Studios, which synthesized professional expertise and opinions, and (2) a Community Consultation Studio with older adults. Input from both groups informed a list of possible solutions and these were ranked based on evaluative criteria of feasibility, person-centeredness, equity, and sustainability.ResultsSparks Innovation Studios identified a lack of ownership, fragmented healthcare systems, and time constraints as the leading barriers to medication reconciliation. The Community Consultation Studio revealed that older adults often feel dismissed in medical encounters and perceive poor communication with and among providers. The Community Consultation Studio and Sparks Innovation Studios resulted in four highly-ranked solutions to improve medication reconciliation: (1) support for older adults to improve health literacy and ownership; (2) ensuring medication indications are included on prescription labels; (3) trainings and incentives for front-line staff in clinic settings to become champions for medication reconciliation; and (4) electronic health record improvements that simplify active medication lists.ConclusionEngaging community representatives with academic partners in the research process enhanced understanding of community priorities and provided a practical roadmap for innovations that have the potential to improve the well-being of community-dwelling older adults.

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.