Drug-related problems identified in post-discharge medication reviews for patients taking warfarin

The impact of clinical pharmacist-physician communication on reducing drug-related problems: a mixed study design in a tertiary teaching Hospital in Xinjiang, China

BACKGROUND

The incidence of drug-related problems (DRPs) has caused serious health hazards and economic burdens among polymedicine patients. Effective communication between clinical pharmacists and physicians has a significant impact on reducing DRPs, but the evidence is poor. This study aimed to explore the impact of communication between clinical pharmacists and physicians on reducing DRPs.

METHODS

A semistructured interview was conducted to explore the communication mode between clinical pharmacists and physicians based on the interprofessional approach of the shared decision-making model and relational coordination theory. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was used to explore the effects of communication intervention on reducing DRPs. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the influencing factors of communication.

RESULTS

The mode of communication is driven by clinical pharmacists between clinical pharmacists and physicians and selectively based on different DRP types. Normally, the communication contents only cover two (33.8%) types of DRP contents or fewer (35.1%). The communication time averaged 5.8 minutes. The communication way is predominantly face-to-face (91.3%), but telephone or other online means (such as WeChat) may be preferred for urgent tasks or long physical distances. Among the 367 participants, 44 patients had DRPs. The RCT results indicated a significant difference in DRP incidence between the control group and the intervention group after the communication intervention (p = 0.02), and the incidence of DRPs in the intervention group was significantly reduced (15.6% vs. 0.07%). Regression analysis showed that communication time had a negative impact on DRP incidence (OR = 13.22, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The communication mode based on the interprofessional approach of the shared decision-making between clinical pharmacists and physicians in medication decision-making could significantly reduce the incidence of DRPs, and the length of communication time is a significant factor. The longer the communication time is, the fewer DRPs that occur.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was approved by the ethics committee of The First Affiliated Hospital of Medical College of Xinjiang Shihezi University Hospital (kj2020-087-03) and registered in the China clinical trial registry (https://www.chictr.org.cn , number ChiCTR2000035321 date: 08/08/2020).

Home medicines reviews and residential medication management reviews in Western Australia

Background Australian government funding for Residential Medication Management Reviews and Home Medicines Reviews commenced in 1997 and 2001 respectively. Limited data are available on their provision in Australia. Objective To investigate the extent and characteristics of Home Medicines Review and Residential Medication Management Review services provided by accredited pharmacists practising in Western Australia. Setting Pharmacists in Western Australia accredited by the Australian Association of Consultant Pharmacy or Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia. Method A paper questionnaire was developed and sent to 198 accredited pharmacists in Western Australia in June 2017. Simple descriptive statistics summarised demographic information and other responses. Logistic regression evaluated factors associated with the frequency of provision of Home Medicines Reviews. Main outcome measure Frequency and factors influencing services provided. Results Of 102 (51.5%) questionnaires returned, 67 (65.7%) respondents were female. Many were aged between 31 and 40 years (53; 52.0%). Most were accredited by the Australian Association of Consultant Pharmacy (101; 99.0%) and mainly offered Home Medicines Reviews (70; 68.6%). Home Medicines Reviews provided over the previous 12 months were limited in frequency with one quarter providing either 1-10 (27; 26.5%) or 21-50 (28; 27.5%) reviews. The median "average" preparation, interview and report writing times, plus communication with other health professionals aggregated to 175.0 min (interquartile range: 140.0-235.0 min) for Home Medicine Reviews and 110.0 min (90.0-140.0) for Residential Medication Management Reviews. Pharmacists born overseas and those who were accredited for a longer time were associated with performing 51 or more Home Medicines Reviews annually. Only one-third (36/101; 35.6%) agreed the current payment was appropriate. Most agreed their Home Medicines Reviews (92/96; 95.8%) and Residential Medication Management Reviews (26/28; 92.9%) provided improved patient outcomes. Over 97% of accredited pharmacists intended to continue to remain accredited. Conclusions Wide variations were evident in the times taken for tasks associated with performing reviews. Most respondents considered their medication reviews contributed to improved patient outcomes. The wide variation in times taken for the reviews suggests a tiered structure for service provision, with appropriate payment within each tier, since most consider current remuneration inadequate.

Pharmacist-led medicine use review in community pharmacy for patients on warfarin

Background Medicine use review by pharmacists has the potential to improve anticoagulation therapy management in patients on warfarin. Objective To develop, implement and evaluate a pharmacist-led medication use review service for patients on warfarin. Setting Six community pharmacies in Malta. Method Patients (N = 100) aged 18 or older and on warfarin were recruited through pre-selected community-pharmacies. These patients were then invited to attend two sessions: a review session (t₁) and a follow-up session after 2 months (t₂). During the medication use review session, medication reconciliation was performed (a) to detect drug-related problems using the DOCUMENT classification system, (b) to develop an individualised care plan for each patient and (c) to recommend an action for each identified problem for physician, pharmacist or patient consideration. At t₂, the degree of acceptance of the recommendations was determined by assessing the number of drug-related problems for which action was taken to address the problem. International normalisation ration (INR) control was evaluated by calculating the percentage Time in Therapeutic Range (TTR) at t₁ and t₂ using the Rosendaal linear interpolation method. Main outcome measures Frequency and type of drug-related problems detected; percentage of accepted recommendations; and INR control. Results A total of 481 drug-related problems were identified; 40% (n = 190) were related to warfarin treatment. Need for monitoring (30%; n = 145), lack of compliance (20%; n = 97) and need for patient education (19%; n = 90) were the top three problems identified. There was a significant correlation between frequency of the problems and number of chronic medications (Spearman Correlation 0.583, p < 0.001), number of comorbidities (Spearman Correlation 0.327, p = 0.001) and older age (Spearman Correlation 0.285, p = 0.04). A total of 475 recommendations were followed-up; 49% (n = 234) were referred for consideration by the physician. The percentage of recommendations accepted (84%; n = 397) was significantly higher than the percentage of recommendations not accepted (16%; n = 78) (p < 0.001). The time in therapeutic range improved significantly from 68.7% at t₁ to 79.8% at t₂ (p = 0.01). Conclusions The high percentage of accepted recommendations and the improvement in INR control indicate that a pharmacist-led medication use review service in community pharmacy contributes to improving anticoagulation therapy management in patients on warfarin.

Investigating the Relative Significance of Drug-Related Problem Categories

The aim of the review was to investigate whether an assessment of clinical significance can be related to specific drug-related problems (DRPs) and hence may assist in prioritizing individual categories of DRP categorization systems. The literature search using Google Scholar was performed for the period 1990 to 2013 and comprised primary research studies of clinical pharmacy interventions including DRP and clinical significance assessments. Two reviewers assessed the titles, abstracts, and full-text papers individually, and inclusion was determined by consensus. A total of 27 unique publications were included in the review. They had been conducted in 14 different countries and reported a large range of DRPs (71-5948). Five existing DRP categorisation systems were frequently used, and two methods employed to assess clinical significance were frequently reported. The present review could not establish a consistent relation between the DRP categories and the level of clinical significance. However, the categories "ADR" and possibly "Drug interaction" were often associated with an assessed high clinical significance, albeit they were infrequently identified in the studies. Hence, clinical significance assessments do not seem to be useful in prioritizing individual DRPs in the DRP categorization systems. Consequently, it may be necessary to reconsider our current approach for evaluating DRPs.

Peter WL. Drug Therapy Problems Identified by Pharmacists Through Comprehensive Medication Management Following Hospital Discharge

Background: Pharmacists influence health care outcomes through the identification and resolution of drug therapy problems (DTPs). Objective: The objectives of this study were to describe number, type, and severity of DTPs based on clinical significance and likelihood of harm in patients transitioning from hospital to home as assessed during a comprehensive medication management (CMM) visit with a pharmacist. Secondary objectives were to assess intrarater reliability in severity ratings and assess likelihood of harm for adverse drug reactions (ADR) by drug classes. Methods: Retrospective review of 408 patients having a face-to-face, telephonic, or virtual CMM visit within the Fairview Health System. Teams of 3 investigators reviewed each DTP from the electronic medical record for each of the 408 patients and assigned a severity score (0-10) for clinical significance and likelihood of harm. Main Results: The highest severity DTP classes were adherence and ADR. The lowest severity DTP class was unnecessary drug therapy. An average of 2.5 DTPs was found per patient at the index CMM visit following hospital discharge. The most common DTP classes were needs additional therapy and dose too low. There were statistically significant differences in DTP severity scoring between reviewer types, though differences were <5%. Drug classes with the highest severity ADR included diabetes, cardiovascular, and anticoagulant/antiplatelet agents. Conclusions: The DTP severity ratings indicated that reviewers found ADR and adherence DTPs were potentially the most severe. There were differences in DTP ratings between reviewer types, though clinical significance of these differences is unclear.

The National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database Qualified Clinical Data Registry: 2015 measure specifications and rationale

Meaningful quality measurement and public reporting have the potential to facilitate targeted outcome improvement, practice-based learning, shared decision making, and effective resource utilization. Recent developments in national quality reporting programs, such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Qualified Clinical Data Registry (QCDR) reporting option, have enhanced the ability of specialty groups to develop relevant quality measures of the care they deliver. QCDRs will complete the collection and submission of Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) quality measures data on behalf of individual eligible professionals. The National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database (N2QOD) offers 21 non-PQRS measures, initially focused on spine procedures, which are the first specialty-specific measures for neurosurgery. Securing QCDR status for N2QOD is a tremendously important accomplishment for our specialty. This program will ensure that data collected through our registries and used for PQRS is meaningful for neurosurgeons, related spine care practitioners, their patients, and other stakeholders. The 2015 N2QOD QCDR is further evidence of neurosurgery’s commitment to substantively advancing the health care quality paradigm. The following manuscript outlines the measures now approved for use in the 2015 N2QOD QCDR. Measure specifications (measure type and descriptions, related measures, if any, as well as relevant National Quality Strategy domain[s]) along with rationale are provided for each measure.

Development of an Aggregated System for Classifying Causes of Drug-Related Problems

Background: More than 20 different types of classification systems for drug-related problems (DRPs) and their causes have been developed. Classification is necessary to describe and assess clinical, organizational, and economic impacts of DRPs through documentation of collected data. However, many researchers have judged classification systems incomplete when describing their data, and have modified them or developed their own. This variability between systems has made study comparisons difficult. Objectives: To perform a category-by-category comparison of the content of selected DRP classification systems to construct an aggregated cause-of-DRP classification system containing the content of all systems. Method: DRP classification systems were identified after a literature review, with 7 chosen based on their use in varied health care settings, geographical diversity, frequency of use, and method of development. These systems were critically analyzed, and the content of each category was compared and aggregated where appropriate. A hierarchy of categories was constructed to include all content from all systems. Any modifications that previous studies may have made to the 7 systems were also cross-referenced to ensure that no concepts were missing from the newly aggregated system. Clinical examples to optimize application, and instructions for when or when not to use categories, were developed. Interrater agreement for classification of the causes of DRPs from 10 medication reviews was performed between 3 clinical pharmacists and the authors’ gold standard. Results: We found variation in developmental methods, category descriptions, number and types of categories, and validation methods between the 7 selected systems, together with intermingling of categories identified as causes of DRPs with DRPs themselves. A hierarchical classification system was constructed consisting of 9 cause-of-DRP categories, 33 subcategories, and 58 sub-subcategories, for which interrater agreements were 82.5%, 74.6%, and 58.8%, respectively. Conclusion: An aggregated classification system was constructed through a unique and transparent developmental process that may provide the most comprehensive description of causes of DRPs to date. This may facilitate teaching of pharmaceutical care, comparisons of clinical practice, and measurement of the effectiveness of pharmaceutical care interventions.

Integration of pharmacists into general practice clinics in Australia: the views of general practitioners and pharmacists

BACKGROUND

Pharmacists working collaboratively with general practitioners (GPs) in primary-care settings can improve patient outcomes; however, there are challenges to the implementation of collaborative services. A possible solution is the co-location of pharmacists within general practice clinics.

OBJECTIVE

To elicit the views of GPs and pharmacists on the integration of pharmacists into general practice in Australia.

METHODS

Semi-structured, individual interviews with a sample of 11 GPs and 16 pharmacists.

KEY FINDINGS

Four major themes emerged: the current GP-pharmacist relationship; the role of the general practice pharmacist; the pros and cons of integration; and the barriers to and facilitators for integration. Most participants had experienced positive inter-professional relationships, though there were limitations in the collaborative services currently provided. Various methods of integration were discussed, including the co-location of pharmacists within practices. The potential roles for practice pharmacists were deemed to be multifaceted and in some cases allowed for role expansion. Although these roles were thought to offer potential benefits to practice staff, patients and pharmacists, they were also perceived to be potentially disadvantageous. The integration of pharmacists into general practice was believed to be hindered by limited funding and infrastructure and by practitioner perceptions. Various facilitating factors were proposed that could help ensure viability of the role.

CONCLUSIONS

Various roles and methods of integration were identified for pharmacists in general practice; however, a number of barriers and facilitators to integration would need to be considered to ensure viability of services. Future research should explore different methods of collaboration and trial their implementation.

Medication review and reconciliation with cooperation between pharmacist and general practitioner and the benefit for the patient: a systematic review

This article systematically reviews the literature on the impact of collaboration between pharmacists and general practitioners and describes its effect on patients' health. A systematic literature search provided 1041 articles. After first review of title and abstract, 152 articles remained. After review of the full text, 83 articles were included. All included articles are presented according to the following variables: (i) reference; (ii) design and setting of the study; (iii) inclusion criteria for patients; (iv) description of the intervention; (v) whether a patient interview was performed to involve patients' experiences with their medicine-taking behaviour; (vi) outcome; (vii) whether healthcare professionals received additional training; and (viii) whether healthcare professionals received financial reimbursement. Many different interventions are described where pharmacists and general practitioners work together to improve patients' health. Only nine studies reported hard outcomes, such as hospital (re)admissions; however, these studies had different results, not all of which were statistically significant. Randomized controlled trials should be able to describe hard outcomes, but large patient groups will be needed to perform such studies. Patient involvement is important for long-term success.

Medication reviews

Recent years have seen a formalization of medication review by pharmacists in all settings of care. This article describes the different types of medication review provided in primary care in the UK National Health Service (NHS), summarizes the evidence of effectiveness and considers how such reviews might develop in the future. Medication review is, at heart, a diagnostic intervention which aims to identify problems for action by the prescriber, the clinician conducting the review, the patient or all three but can also be regarded as an educational intervention to support patient knowledge and adherence. There is good evidence that medication review improves process outcomes of prescribing including reduced polypharmacy, use of more appropriate medicines formulation and more appropriate choice of medicine. When 'harder' outcome measures have been included, such as hospitalizations or mortality in elderly patients, available evidence indicates that whilst interventions could improve knowledge and adherence they did not reduce mortality or hospital admissions with one study showing an increase in hospital admissions. Robust health economic studies of medication reviews remain rare. However a review of cost-effectiveness analyses of medication reviews found no studies in which the cost of the intervention was greater than the benefit. The value of medication reviews is now generally accepted despite lack of robust research evidence consistently demonstrating cost or clinical effectiveness compared with traditional care. Medication reviews can be more effectively deployed in the future by targeting, multi-professional involvement and paying greater attention to medicines which could be safely stopped.

An exploration of the role of pharmacists within general practice clinics: the protocol for the pharmacists in practice study (PIPS)

Background

Medication-related problems are a serious concern in Australian primary care. Pharmacist interventions have been shown to be effective in identifying and resolving these problems. Collaborative general practitioner-pharmacist services currently available in Australia are limited and underused. Limitations include geographical isolation of pharmacists and lack of communication and access to patient information. Co-location of pharmacists within the general practice clinics is a possible solution. There have been no studies in the Australian setting exploring the role of pharmacists within general practice clinics.

The aim of this study is to develop and test a multifaceted practice pharmacist role in primary care practices to improve the quality use of medicines by patients and clinic staff.

Methods/design

This is a multi-centre, prospective intervention study with a pre-post design and a qualitative component. A practice pharmacist will be located in each of two clinics and provide short and long patient consultations, drug information services and quality assurance activities. Patients receiving long consultation with a pharmacist will be followed up at 3 and 6 months. Based on sample size calculations, at least 50 patients will be recruited for long patient consultations across both sites. Outcome measures include the number, type and severity of medication-related problems identified and resolved; medication adherence; and patient satisfaction. Brief structured interviews will be conducted with patients participating in the study to evaluate their experiences with the service. Staff collaboration and satisfaction with the service will be assessed.

Discussion

This intervention has the potential to optimise medication use in primary care clinics leading to better health outcomes. This study will provide data about the effectiveness of the proposed model for pharmacist involvement in Australian general practice clinics, that will be useful to guide further research and development in this area.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12612000742875