Effect of a ward-based pharmacy team on preventable adverse drug events in surgical patients (SUREPILL study)

Potential costs and consequences associated with medication error at hospital discharge: an expert judgement study

OBJECTIVES

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of complex pharmaceutical care interventions and medication error outcomes is hindered by lack of available data on actual outcomes consequent to errors that were intercepted for patient safety reasons. Expert judgement is an approach to acquire data regarding unknown parameters in an economic model which are otherwise insufficient or not possible to obtain. The aim of this paper is to describe a method to approach this problem using findings from a single intervention study and to calculate the potential costs and consequences associated with discharge medication error.

METHODS

Using data from a previous intervention study, the hypothetical consequences of medication error(s) at hospital discharge, in terms of diagnosis, healthcare resource utilisation and impact on health-related quality of life, were identified by expert judgement of anonymised cases. Primary healthcare utilisation costs were derived from published tariffs, inpatient costs were derived by simulation in the hospital discharge activity database test environment and the difference between adjudicated baseline and posterror health state was expressed as quality-adjusted life year (QALY) decrement.

RESULTS

Four experts provided judgement on 81 cases. Of these, 75 were judged to have potential clinical consequences. Between 56 and 69 of the 81 cases were variably judged to require remedial healthcare utilisation. The mean calculated cost per case (representing an individual patient), based on all 81 cases, was €1009.58, 95% CI 726.64 to 1585.67. The mean QALY loss was 0.03 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.05).

CONCLUSION

An expert judgement process proved feasible and useful to estimate financial cost and QALY loss associated with hospital discharge medication error. These estimates will be employed in model-based economic evaluation. This method could be transferred to other prospective observational patient safety research which seeks to assess value for money of complex interventions.

Medication review in hospitalised patients to reduce morbidity and mortality

BACKGROUND

A medication review can be defined as a structured evaluation of a patient's medication conducted by healthcare professionals with the aim of optimising medication use and improving health outcomes. Optimising medication therapy though medication reviews may benefit hospitalised patients.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the effects of medication review interventions in hospitalised adult patients compared to standard care or to other types of medication reviews on all-cause mortality, hospital readmissions, emergency department contacts and health-related quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

In this Cochrane Review update, we searched for new published and unpublished trials using the following electronic databases from 1 January 2014 to 17 January 2022 without language restrictions: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). To identify additional trials, we searched the reference lists of included trials and other publications by lead trial authors, and contacted experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of medication reviews delivered by healthcare professionals for hospitalised adult patients. We excluded trials including outpatients and paediatric patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for data clarification and relevant unpublished data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous data (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the overall certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we included a total of 25 trials (15,076 participants), of which 15 were new trials (11,501 participants). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 20 months. We found that medication reviews in hospitalised adults may have little to no effect on mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05; 18 trials, 10,108 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce hospital readmissions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 17 trials, 9561 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce emergency department contacts (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.03; 8 trials, 3527 participants; low-certainty evidence) and have very uncertain effects on health-related quality of life (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.30; 4 trials, 392 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Medication reviews in hospitalised adult patients likely reduce hospital readmissions and may reduce emergency department contacts. The evidence suggests that mediation reviews may have little to no effect on mortality, while the effect on health-related quality of life is very uncertain. Almost all trials included elderly polypharmacy patients, which limits the generalisability of the results beyond this population.

Drug-related problems and determinants among elective surgical patients: A prospective observational study

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess drug-related problems and determinants among elective surgical patients admitted to Jimma University Medical Center.

Methods

A hospital-based prospective observational study was conducted at Jimma University Medical Center, from April 10 to July 10, 2018. Data were collected through patients' interview and physicians' medication orders and charts review using pre-tested questionnaire and data abstraction formats. Drug-related problems were assessed for each patient using drug-related problem classification tool. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Science for windows; version 21.0. The predictors of drug-related problems were determined by multivariable logistic regression analysis. A p-value of less than or equal to 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

Of the total 141 participants, 98 (69.5%) of them had at least one drug-related problem during their hospital stay. A total of 152 drug-related problems were identified among 141 elective surgical patients. The most common identified drug-related problems were indication-related problems (39%) followed by effectiveness-related problems (21%) and safety-related problems (21%). The presence of complication (adjusted odds ratio = 2.90, 95% confidence interval (1.302, 3.460)), American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status ⩾ 2 (adjusted odds ratio = 6.01, 95% confidence interval (1.0011, 9.500)), and postoperative antibiotics (adjusted odds ratio = 6.027, 95% confidence interval (1.594, 22.792)) were independent predictors of drug-related problems.

Conclusion

The prevalence of drug-related problems is high among elective surgical patients. The indication-related problems were the most common category of drug-related problem identified among elective surgical patients. The presence of complication, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status ⩾ 2, and postoperative antibiotics were the independent predictors of drug-related problems.

Reducing medication errors for adults in hospital settings

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are preventable events that may cause or lead to inappropriate medication use or patient harm while the medication is in the control of the healthcare professional or patient. Medication errors in hospitalised adults may cause harm, additional costs, and even death.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions to reduce medication errors in adults in hospital settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers on 16 January 2020.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies investigating interventions aimed at reducing medication errors in hospitalised adults, compared with usual care or other interventions. Outcome measures included adverse drug events (ADEs), potential ADEs, preventable ADEs, medication errors, mortality, morbidity, length of stay, quality of life and identified/solved discrepancies. We included any hospital setting, such as inpatient care units, outpatient care settings, and accident and emergency departments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. Where necessary, we extracted and reanalysed ITS study data using piecewise linear regression, corrected for autocorrelation and seasonality, where possible.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 65 studies: 51 RCTs and 14 ITS studies, involving 110,875 participants. About half of trials gave rise to 'some concerns' for risk of bias during the randomisation process and one-third lacked blinding of outcome assessment. Most ITS studies presented low risk of bias. Most studies came from high-income countries or high-resource settings. Medication reconciliation -the process of comparing a patient's medication orders to the medications that the patient has been taking- was the most common type of intervention studied. Electronic prescribing systems, barcoding for correct administering of medications, organisational changes, feedback on medication errors, education of professionals and improved medication dispensing systems were other interventions studied. Medication reconciliation Low-certainty evidence suggests that medication reconciliation (MR) versus no-MR may reduce medication errors (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.74; 3 studies; n=379). Compared to no-MR, MR probably reduces ADEs (OR 0.38, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.80; 3 studies, n=1336 ; moderate-certainty evidence), but has little to no effect on length of stay (mean difference (MD) -0.30 days, 95%CI -1.93 to 1.33 days; 3 studies, n=527) and quality of life (MD -1.51, 95%CI -10.04 to 7.02; 1 study, n=131).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may reduce medication errors (OR 0.21, 95%CI 0.09 to 0.48; 8 studies, n=2648) and may increase ADEs (OR 1.34, 95%CI 0.73 to 2.44; 3 studies, n=2873). Compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may have little to no effect on length of stay (MD -0.25, 95%CI -1.05 to 0.56; 6 studies, 3983). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that this intervention probably has little to no effect on mortality during hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95%CI 0.57 to 1.7; 2 studies, n=1000), and on readmissions at one month (RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.14; 2 studies, n=997); and low-certainty evidence suggests that the intervention may have little to no effect on quality of life (MD 0.00, 95%CI -14.09 to 14.09; 1 study, n=724).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that database-assisted MR conducted by pharmacists, versus unassisted MR conducted by pharmacists, may reduce potential ADEs (OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.64; 2 studies, n=3326), and may have no effect on length of stay (MD 1.00, 95%CI -0.17 to 2.17; 1 study, n=311).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR performed by trained pharmacist technicians, versus pharmacists, may have little to no difference on length of stay (MD -0.30, 95%CI -2.12 to 1.52; 1 study, n=183). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR before admission may increase the identification of discrepancies compared with MR after admission (MD 1.27, 95%CI 0.46 to 2.08; 1 study, n=307). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that multimodal interventions probably increase discrepancy resolutions compared to usual care (RR 2.14, 95%CI 1.81 to 2.53; 1 study, n=487). Computerised physician order entry (CPOE)/clinical decision support systems (CDSS) Moderate-certainty evidence shows that CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors compared to paper-based systems (OR 0.74, 95%CI 0.31 to 1.79; 2 studies, n=88).  Moderate-certainty evidence shows that, compared with standard CPOE/CDSS, improved CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.97; 2 studies, n=630). Low-certainty evidence suggests that prioritised alerts provided by CPOE/CDSS may prevent ADEs compared to non-prioritised (inconsequential) alerts (MD 1.98, 95%CI 1.65 to 2.31; 1 study; participant numbers unavailable). Barcode identification of participants/medications Low-certainty evidence suggests that barcoding may reduce medication errors (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.59 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=50,545). Reduced working hours Low-certainty evidence suggests that reduced working hours may reduce serious medication errors (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.63 to 1.09; 1 study, n=634). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Feedback on prescribing errors Low-certainty evidence suggests that feedback on prescribing errors may reduce medication errors (OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.67; 4 studies, n=384). Dispensing system Low-certainty evidence suggests that dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors (OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=1775).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to usual care, medication reconciliation, CPOE/CDSS, barcoding, feedback and dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors and ADEs. However, the results are imprecise for some outcomes related to medication reconciliation and CPOE/CDSS. The evidence for other interventions is very uncertain. Powered and methodologically sound studies are needed to address the identified evidence gaps. Innovative, synergistic strategies -including those that involve patients- should also be evaluated.

The Impact of Pharmaceutical Care in Multidisciplinary Teams on Health Outcomes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Pharmacists' care has an essential role in multidisciplinary teams in charge of chronic patients. However, data available on the clinical outcomes of these activities appear inconclusive. This study aimed to systematically investigate the effect of multidisciplinary teams that include coordinated pharmaceutical care on clinical outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis. Relevant studies identified from MEDLINE, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL databases were analyzed. The search included randomized clinical trials published in 2000-2018. Included studies were all published studies in English that compared the effectiveness of multidisciplinary teams including pharmacist care to usual care. Meta-analysis was carried out using a random effects model, and subgroup analysis was conducted to determine the sources of heterogeneity.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

29 studies involving 4186 adult patients were included.

MEASURES

Follow-up time varied from 30 to 180 days. The most common primary endpoint was the frequency of hospitalizations or readmissions, followed by variation in clinical parameter variables related to quality of prescription, treatment adherence and costs.

RESULTS

Twelve (41.3%) of the included studies scored low risk of bias according to the AMSTAR-2 scale, the remaining 17 (58.7%) being classified as intermediate risk. The intervention of a multidisciplinary team reduced the probability of readmission by 32% [odds ratio (OR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.89]. Six of the 29 (20.7%) studies included met the inclusion criteria of the meta-analysis on quality-of-life outcomes. The intervention of the multidisciplinary team represented a significant increase in patients' quality of life (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.47-0.69). Analysis of heterogeneity showed a significant difference between the studies. No evidence of publication bias was identified.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Multidisciplinary programs that include pharmaceutical care reduce the risk of visiting hospitals and improve patients' quality of life. This review supports the importance of the pharmacists as part of multidisciplinary teams.

Impact of pharmacist interventions on drug-related problems in general surgery patients: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

The inappropriate use of medications is harmful and is a common issue in hospitalised patients. Patients hospitalised in general surgery wards are usually at high risk for drug-related problems (DRPs). This randomised controlled trial aimed to explore the value of a pharmaceutical care service conducted in general surgery wards in the identification and reduction of DRPs in comparison with standard medical care.

METHODS

This study was conducted in general surgery wards including abdominal, cardiovascular, vascular, endocrine, orthopaedic and oncological surgeries at one of the largest teaching hospitals in Jordan over a period of 6 months. Recruited patients were randomised into intervention or control groups. Clinical pharmacists assessed patients' DRPs and submitted recommendations to resolve the identified DRPs in the intervention group.

RESULTS

Patients in the intervention group (n=63) and the control group (n=60) had a mean age of 55±14.4 years, with 52.0% being women. A total of 1062 DRPs were identified, with a mean of 8.6±3.6 per patient (intervention group, 8.65±4.2; control group, 8.62±2.6; p=0.56). The commonly identified DRPs included safety (20.2%) and efficacy (19.0%) issues. The acceptance rate for pharmacists' recommendations by physicians was very high (90%) with a good DRP correction rate of 58.9% during patients' hospital stay. The value of pharmaceutical care was significantly reflected in the achievement of the therapeutic outcomes and prevention of morbidity (resolved/improved or prevented) of 68.2% (24.2%+44%) in the intervention group compared with 19.2% (12.4%+6.8%) in the control group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that DRPs are common among general surgery patients in Jordan, especially those related to drug safety and efficacy. Pharmacists' recommendations contributed substantially to resolving most of the identified DRPs and had a significant impact on improving medications used in general surgery patients.

The pharmacotherapy team: A novel strategy to improve appropriate in-hospital prescribing using a participatory intervention action method

AIMS

Prescribing medication is a complex process that, when done inappropriately, can lead to adverse drug events, resulting in patient harm and hospital admissions. Worldwide cost is estimated at 42 billion USD each year. Despite several efforts in the past years, medication-related harm has not declined. The aim was to determine whether a prescriber-focussed participatory action intervention, initiated by a multidisciplinary pharmacotherapy team, is able to reduce the number of in-hospital prescriptions containing ≥1 prescribing error (PE), by identifying and reducing challenges in appropriate prescribing.

METHODS

A prospective single-centre before- and after study was conducted in an academic hospital in the Netherlands. Twelve clinical wards (medical, surgical, mixed and paediatric) were recruited.

RESULTS

Overall, 321 patients with a total of 2978 prescriptions at baseline were compared with 201 patients with 2438 prescriptions postintervention. Of these, m456 prescriptions contained ≥1 PE (15.3%) at baseline and 357 prescriptions contained ≥1 PEs (14.6%) postintervention. PEs were determined in multidisciplinary consensus. On some study wards, a trend toward a decreasing number of PEs was observed. The intervention was associated with a nonsignificant difference in PEs (incidence rate ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.10), which was unaltered after correction. The most important identified challenges were insufficient knowledge beyond own expertise, unawareness of guidelines and a heavy workload.

CONCLUSION

The tailored interventions developed with and implemented by stakeholders led to a statistically nonsignificant reduction in inappropriate in-hospital prescribing after a 6-month intervention period. Our prescriber-focussed participatory action intervention identified challenges in appropriate in-hospital prescribing on prescriber- and organizational level.

Interventions to deprescribe potentially inappropriate medications in the elderly: Lost in translation?

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) remains common in older adults, despite the easy availability of screening tools such as the Beers and Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria. Multiple published studies have implemented these screening tools to encourage deprescribing of PIMs, with mixed results. Little is known about the reasons behind the success or failure of these interventions, or what could be done to improve their impact. Implementation science (IS) provides a set of theories, models and frameworks to address these questions. The goal of this study was to conduct a focused narrative review of the deprescribing literature through an IS lens-to determine the extent to which implementation factors were identified and the intermediate steps in the intervention were measured. A better understanding of the existing literature, including its gaps, may provide a roadmap for future research.

METHODS

PubMed search from 2000-2019 using appropriate MeSH headings.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

controlled trials or prospective cohort studies intended to reduce PIMs in the elderly that used hospitalizations and/or emergency department visits as outcome measures. Studies were reviewed to identify potential implementation factors (known as determinants), using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) as a guide. In addition, intermediate outcomes were extracted.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Of the 548 reviewed abstracts, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent detailed analysis. Of the 14 studies, 10 acknowledged potential implementation determinants that could be mapped onto CFIR. The most commonly identified determinant was the degree of pharmacist integration into the medical team (seven of 14 studies), which mapped onto the CFIR construct of 'networks and communication'. Several important CFIR constructs were absent in the reviewed literature. Intermediate measures were captured by 12 of the 14 reviewed papers, but the choice of measures was inconsistent across studies.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

In recent high-quality studies of deprescribing interventions, we found limited acknowledgement of factors known to be important to successful implementation and inconsistent reporting of intermediate outcomes. These findings indicate missed opportunities to understand the factors underlying study outcomes. As a result, we run the risk of rejecting worthwhile interventions due to negative results, when the correct interpretation might be that they failed in implementation. In other words, they were 'lost in translation'. Studies that rigorously examine and report on the implementation process are needed to tease apart this important distinction.

Multifaceted Pharmacist-led Interventions in the Hospital Setting: A Systematic Review

Clinical pharmacy services often comprise complex interventions. In this MiniReview, we conducted a systematic review aiming to evaluate the impact of multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions in a hospital setting. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL for peer-reviewed articles published from 2006 to 1 March 2018. Controlled trials concerning hospitalized patients in any setting receiving patient-related multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions were considered. All types of outcome were accepted. Inclusion and data extraction were performed. Study characteristics were collected, and risk of bias assessment was conducted utilizing the Cochrane Risk of Bias tools. All stages were conducted by at least two independent reviewers. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017075808). A total of 11,896 publications were identified, and 28 publications were included. Of these, 17 were conducted in Europe. Six of the included publications were multi-centre studies, and 16 were randomized trials. Usual care was the comparator. Significant results on quality of medication use were reported as positive in eleven studies (n = 18; 61%) and negative in one (n = 18, 6%). Hospital visits were reduced significantly in seven studies (n = 16; 44%). Four studies (n = 12; 33%) reported a positive significant effect on either length of stay or time to revisit, and one study reported a negative effect (n = 12; 6%). All studies investigating mortality (n = 6), patient-reported outcome (n = 7) and cost-effectiveness (n = 1) showed no significant results. This MiniReview indicates that multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions in a hospital setting may improve the quality of medication use and reduce hospital visits and length of stay, while no effect was seen on mortality, patient-reported outcome and cost-effectiveness.

A multifaceted intervention to reduce drug-related complications in surgical patients

AIM

The P-REVIEW study was a prospective, multicenter, open intervention study, designed to determine whether a multifaceted intervention of educating the prescriber combined with medication review and pharmaceutical visits to the ward by the hospital pharmacist could lead to a reduction in drug-related complications among surgical patients.

METHODS

A total of 6780 admissions of 5940 patients to surgical, urological and orthopaedic wards during the usual care period and 6484 admissions of 5711 patients during the intervention period were included. An educational programme covering pain management, antithrombotics, fluid and electrolyte management, prescription in case of renal insufficiency and antibiotics was developed. National and local hospital guidelines were included. Hospital pharmacists performed medication safety consultations, combining medication review of high-risk patients and a visit to the physician on the ward.

RESULTS

A significantly lower proportion of admissions with one or more clinically relevant, potentially preventable, drug-related problems (including death, temporary or sustained disability, increased length of hospital stay or readmission within 30 days) occurred in the intervention period (1.1% (73/6484) compared to the usual care period [1.6% (106/6780)] (P = 0.029). The relative risk (RR) was 0.72 (95% CI 0.53-0.97). Several types of drug-related problems occurred less frequently. Costs incurred as result of time spent on study-related activities were not different before and after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The P-REVIEW study shows that education and support of the prescribing physician with respect to high-risk patients in surgical departments leads to a significant, clinically relevant benefit for patients without generating additional costs.