The impact of a pharmacist on post-take ward round prescribing and medication appropriateness

What is impacting clinical pharmacists' participation in an interprofessional ward round: a thematic analysis of a national survey

The ward round (WR) is an important opportunity for interprofessional interaction and communication enabling optimal patient care. Pharmacists' participation in the interprofessional WR can reduce adverse drug events and improve medication appropriateness and communication. WR participation by clinical pharmacists in Australia is currently limited. This study aims to explore what is impacting clinical pharmacists' participation in WRs in Australian hospitals. A self-administered, anonymous national survey of Australian clinical pharmacists was conducted. This study describes the outcomes from qualitative questions which were analyzed thematically in NVivo-2020 according to Braun and Clarke's techniques. Five themes were constructed: "Clinical pharmacy service structure", "Ward round structure", "Pharmacist's capabilities", "Culture" and "Value". A culture supportive of pharmacist's contribution with a consistent WR structure and flexible delivery of clinical pharmacy services enabled pharmacists' participation in WR. Being physically "absent" from the WR due to workload, workflow, and self-perception of the need for extensive clinical knowledge can limit opportunities for pharmacists to proactively contribute to medicines decision-making with physicians to improve patient care outcomes. Bidirectional communication between the interprofessional team and the pharmacist, where there is a co-construction of each individual's role in the WR facilitates consistent and inter-dependent collaborations for effective medication management.

Clinical pharmacists' participation in ward rounds in hospitals: responses from a national survey

OBJECTIVES

The inclusion of clinical pharmacists in ward rounds (WRs) can reduce adverse drug events, improve communication and enable collaborative decision-making. The aim of this study is to investigate the level of and factors that influence WR participation by clinical pharmacists in Australia.

METHODS

An online administered, anonymous survey of clinical pharmacists in Australia was conducted. The survey was open to pharmacists aged ≥18 years, who had worked in an Australian hospital in a clinical role in the previous two weeks. It was distributed via The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia and on pharmacist-specific social media threads. Survey questions related to the extent of WR participation and factors that influence WR participation. Cross-tabulation analysis was conducted to determine whether there was an association between WR participation and factors that influence WR participation.

KEY FINDINGS

Ninety-nine responses were included. The level of WR participation by clinical pharmacists in Australian hospitals was low, with only 26/67 (39%) pharmacists who had a WR in their clinical unit actually attending the WR in the previous 2 weeks. Factors that influenced WR participation included having recognition of the role of the clinical pharmacist within the WR team, support from pharmacy management and the broader interprofessional team, and having adequate time and expectation from pharmacy management and colleagues to participate in WRs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the need for ongoing interventions such as restructuring workflows and increasing the awareness of the role of a clinical pharmacist in WR to increase participation of pharmacists in this interprofessional activity.

Evaluation of the impact of the addition of a heart failure prescribing pharmacist to consultant-led heart failure ward round at a tertiary hospital

OBJECTIVE

Pharmacists attending general medical post-admission ward rounds is established good practice. However, there is a lack of evidence on the impact of specialist heart failure (HF) prescribing pharmacists on consultant HF ward rounds. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact on prescribing when a specialist HF prescribing pharmacist attended inpatient HF ward rounds.

METHODS

A prospective service evaluation completed at a tertiary hospital between September and December 2020. The same HF prescribing pharmacist attended the HF consultant-led ward round once a week on 15 occasions. For each medicine change, the pharmacist documented: who suggested the intervention, the medicine, prescribing action, reason for review and the primary reason for change. Medicines were categorised into four groups (heart failure, cardiovascular, anticoagulation and other) for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 158 patients were reviewed and 226 individual changes suggested; 48% of these were consultant led (n=108) and 52% (n=118) due to pharmacist recommendations. All medicines interventions were prescribed on the round by the pharmacist. For consultants, the primary reason for medicine change was to ensure efficacy of HF medicines, 80% (n=73), followed by safety (HF medicines), 20% (n=18). For the pharmacist, the primary reason was safety across all the medicine groups, 36% (n=42), followed by efficacy relating to missing drug history items, 24% (n=28).

CONCLUSIONS

HF consultants focused on ensuring patients have the most effective combination of HF medications. The addition of a specialist HF prescribing pharmacist ensured a wider range of medicines were reviewed for safety and optimisation, helping to deliver a holistic review of all medications.

The First Modified Delphi Consensus-Building Exercise on Surgical Ward Rounds in the United Kingdom National Health Service

BACKGROUND

The ward round is an integral part of everyday surgical practice. It is a complex clinical activity that requires both sound clinical management and communication skills. This study reports the results of a consensus-building exercise on the common aspects of the general surgical ward rounds.

METHODS

The consensus-building committee involving a range of stakeholders from 16 United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service trusts took part in this consensus exercise. The members discussed and suggested a series of statements concerning surgical ward round. An agreement of ≥ 70% among members was regarded as a consensus.

RESULTS

Thirty-two members voted on 60 statements. There was a consensus on fifty-nine statements after the first round of voting, and one statement was modified before it reached consensus in the second round. The statements covered nine sections: a preparation phase, team allocation, multidisciplinary approach to the ward round, structure of the round, teaching considerations, confidentiality and privacy, documentation, post-round arrangements, and weekend round. There was a consensus on spending time to prepare for the round, a consultant-led round, involvement of the nursing staff, an MDT round at the beginning and end of the week, a minimum of 5 min allocated to each patient, utilisation of a round checklist, afternoon virtual round, and a clear handover and plan for the weekend.

CONCLUSION

The consensus committee achieved agreement on several aspects concerning the surgical ward rounds in the UK NHS. This should help improve the care of surgical patients in the UK.

The Impact of a Pharmacist-Led Intravenous to Oral Switch of Metronidazole: A Before-and-After Study

(1) Background. Intravenous (IV) to oral switch (IVOS) of antibiotics can reduce the length of hospitalisation, risk of IV catheter complications, and hospital costs. Pharmacists can play an instrumental role in implementing an IVOS initiative. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of pharmacist-led IVOS of metronidazole. (2) Method. This was an observational study conducted in a New Zealand hospital. During a 3-month intervention period, pharmacists identified patients receiving IV metronidazole; then initiated an IVOS for patients who met the criteria. The comparator groups were patients who were not switched by pharmacists in the post-intervention (post-IVOS) group, or patients treated with either IV or oral metronidazole prior to the intervention (pre-IVOS). Primary outcome measures were switch rate and duration of IV metronidazole treatment. Secondary outcome measures were readmission and/or repeat surgery within 90 days of discharge and the length of hospital stay. (3) Results. In total, 203 patients were included: 100 in the pre-IVOS and 103 in the post-IVOS groups. Pharmacists switched 63/93 (67.7%) of eligible patients to oral metronidazole in the post-IVOS period. Only 9/89 (10.1%) of IVOS eligible patients were switched in the pre-IVOS group. In the post-IVOS group, the mean duration of IV metronidazole treatment in patients switched by pharmacists was shorter than in those who were not switched by pharmacists (2.5 ± 2.8 days vs. 4.8 ± 5.9 days, p = 0.012). No significant difference was found in readmission or repeat surgery within 90 days of discharge for patients switched by pharmacists versus patients who were not switched by pharmacists. (4) Conclusion. Our data have demonstrated successful implementation of the hospital-approved pharmacist-led IVOS service.

Factors affecting physician implementation of hospital pharmacists' medication appropriateness recommendations in older adults

AIMS

Non-implementation of pharmacist recommendations by physician prescribers may prolong potentially inappropriate prescribing in hospitalised older adults, increasing the risk of adverse clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to ascertain the key factors affecting physician prescriber implementation of pharmacists' medication appropriateness recommendations in hospitalised older adults.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with hospital pharmacists and physicians who provided care to older adults (≥65 years) in 2 acute university teaching hospitals in Ireland. Content analysis was employed to identify the key themes that influence physician prescriber implementation of pharmacist recommendations.

RESULTS

Fourteen interviews were conducted with 6 hospital pharmacists and 8 hospital physicians between August 2018 and August 2019. Five key factors were found to affect physician implementation of pharmacist recommendations: (i) the clinical relevance and complexity of the recommendation-recommendations of higher priority and those that do not require complex decision-making are implemented more readily; (ii) interprofessional communication-recommendations provided verbally, particularly those communicated face to face with confidence and assertion, are more likely to be implemented than written recommendations; (iii) physician role and identity-the grade, specialty, and personality of the physician significantly affect implementation; (iv) knowing each other and developing trusting relationships-personal acquaintance and the development of interprofessional trust and rapport greatly facilitate recommendation implementation; and (v) the hospital environment-organisational issues such as documentation in the patient notes, having the opportunity to intervene, and the clinical pharmacy model all affect implementation.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a deeper understanding of the underlying behavioural determinants affecting physician prescriber implementation of pharmacist recommendations and will aid in the development of theoretically-informed interventions to improve medication appropriateness in hospitalised older adults.

Sustainable Development Goals relevant to kidney health: an update on progress

Globally, more than 5 million people die annually from lack of access to critical treatments for kidney disease — by 2040, chronic kidney disease is projected to be the fifth leading cause of death worldwide. Kidney diseases are particularly challenging to tackle because they are pathologically diverse and are often asymptomatic. As such, kidney disease is often diagnosed late, and the global burden of kidney disease continues to be underappreciated. When kidney disease is not detected and treated early, patient care requires specialized resources that drive up cost, place many people at risk of catastrophic health expenditure and pose high opportunity costs for health systems. Prevention of kidney disease is highly cost-effective but requires a multisectoral holistic approach. Each Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) has the potential to impact kidney disease risk or improve early diagnosis and treatment, and thus reduce the need for high-cost care. All countries have agreed to strive to achieve the SDGs, but progress is disjointed and uneven among and within countries. The six SDG Transformations framework can be used to examine SDGs with relevance to kidney health that require attention and reveal inter-linkages among the SDGs that should accelerate progress.

Working towards sustainable development is essential to tackle the rise in the global burden of non-communicable diseases, including kidney disease. Five years after the Sustainable Development Goal agenda was set, this Review examines the progress thus far, highlighting future challenges and opportunities, and explores the implications for kidney disease.

Each Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) has the potential to improve kidney health and prevent kidney disease by improving the general health and well-being of individuals and societies, and by protecting the environment.

Achievement of each SDG is interrelated to the achievement of multiple other SDGs; therefore, a multisectoral approach is required.

The global burden of kidney disease has been relatively underestimated because of a lack of data.

Structural violence and the social determinants of health have an important impact on kidney disease risk.

Kidney disease is the leading global cause of catastrophic health expenditure, in part because of the high costs of kidney replacement therapy.

Achievement of universal health coverage is the minimum requirement to ensure sustainable and affordable access to early detection and quality treatment of kidney disease and/or its risk factors, which should translate to a reduction in the burden of kidney failure in the future.

Both New and Chronic Potentially Inappropriate Medications Continued at Hospital Discharge Are Associated With Increased Risk of Adverse Events

BACKGROUND

Admission to hospital provides the opportunity to review patient medications; however, the extent to which the safety of drug regimens changes after hospitalization is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) prescribed to patients at hospital discharge and their association with the risk of adverse events 30 days after discharge.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care hospitals within the McGill University Health Centre Network in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients from internal medicine, cardiac, and thoracic surgery, aged 65 years and older, admitted between October 2014 and November 2016.

MEASURES

Abstracted chart data were linked to provincial health databases. PIMs were identified using AGS (American Geriatrics Society) Beers Criteria®, STOPP, and Choosing Wisely statements. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox models were used to assess the association between PIMs and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of 2,402 included patients, 1,381 (57%) were male; median age was 76 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 70‐82 years); and eight discharge medications were prescribed (IQR = 2‐8). A total of 1,576 (66%) patients were prescribed at least one PIM at discharge; 1,176 (49%) continued a PIM from prior to admission, and 755 (31%) were prescribed at least one new PIM. In the 30 days after discharge, 218 (9%) experienced an adverse drug event (ADE) and 862 (36%) visited the emergency department (ED), were rehospitalized, or died. After adjustment, each additional new PIM and continued community PIM were respectively associated with a 21% (odds ratio [OR] = 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01‐1.45) and a 10% (OR = 1.10; 95% CI = 1.01‐1.21) increased odds of ADEs. They were also respectively associated with a 13% (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.13; 95% CI = 1.03‐1.26) and a 5% (HR = 1.05; 95% CI = 1.00‐1.10) increased risk of ED visits, rehospitalization, and death.

CONCLUSIONS

Two in three hospitalized patients were prescribed a PIM at discharge, and increasing numbers of PIMs were associated with an increased risk of ADEs and all‐cause adverse events. Improving hospital prescribing practices may reduce the frequency of PIMs and associated adverse events. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1184–1192, 2020.

See related editorial by Donna M. Fick in this issue.

The impact of a Post-Take Ward Round Pharmacist on the Risk Score and Enactment of Medication-Related Recommendations

There is a scarcity of published research describing the impact of a pharmacist on the post-take ward round (PTWR) in addition to ward-based pharmacy services. The aim of this paper was to evaluate the impact of clinical pharmacists' participation on the PTWR on the risk assessment scores of medication-related recommendations with and without a pharmacist. This includes medication-related recommendations occurring on the PTWR and those recommendations made by the ward-based pharmacist on the inpatient ward. A pre-post intervention study was undertaken that compared the impact of adding a pharmacist to the PTWR compared with ward-based pharmacist services alone. A panel reviewed the risk of not acting on medication recommendations that was made on the PTWR and those recorded by the ward-based pharmacist. The relationship between the risk scores and the number and proportion of recommendations that led to action were compared between study groups. There were more medication-related recommendations on the PTWR in the intervention group when a pharmacist was present. Proportionately fewer were in the 'very high and extreme' risk category. Although there was no difference in the number of ward pharmacist recommendations between groups, there was a significantly higher proportion of ward pharmacist recommendations in the "very high and extreme" category in those patients who had been seen on a PTWR attended by a pharmacist than when a pharmacist was not present. There were a greater proportion of "low and medium" risk actionable medication recommendations actioned on the PTWR in the intervention group; and no difference in the risk scores in ward pharmacist recommendations actioned between groups. Overall, the proportion of recommendations that were actioned was higher for those made on the PTWR compared with the ward. The addition of a pharmacist to the PTWR resulted in an increase in low, medium, and high risk recommendations on the PTWR, more very high and extreme risk recommendations made by the ward-based pharmacist, plus an increased number of recommendations being actioned during the patients' admission.