What types of information do pharmacists include in comprehensive medication management review reports? A qualitative content analysis

Validation of an algorithm to prioritize patients for comprehensive medication management in primary care settings

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive medication management (CMM) programs optimize the effectiveness and safety of patients' medication regimens, but CMM may be underutilized. Whether healthcare claims data can identify patients appropriate for CMM is not well-studied.

AIM

Determine the face validity of a claims-based algorithm to prioritize patients who likely need CMM.

METHOD

We used claims data to construct patient-level markers of "regimen complexity" and "high-risk for adverse effects," which were combined to define four categories of claims-based CMM-need (very likely, likely, unlikely, very unlikely) among 180 patient records. Three clinicians independently reviewed each record to assess CMM need. We assessed concordance between the claims-based and clinician-review CMM need by calculating percent agreement as well as kappa statistic.

RESULTS

Most records identified as 'very likely' (90%) by claims-based markers were identified by clinician-reviewers as needing CMM. Few records within the 'very unlikely' group (5%) were identified by clinician-reviewers as needing CMM. Interrater agreement between CMM-based algorithm and clinician review was moderate in strength (kappa = 0.6, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Claims-based pharmacy measures may offer a valid approach to prioritize patients into CMM-need groups. Further testing of this algorithm is needed prior to implementation in clinic settings.

FATAL: A Forensic AuTopsy Annotation tooL for digital recording of autopsy findings

The findings from forensic autopsies, where cause of death must be established and reported to legal authorities, are reported in paper-based formats. Practitioners are required to map 3D injury findings to 2D space. Here, we design and describe a digital Forensic AuTopsy Annotation tooL (FATAL), that can be used by practitioners to record systematically detailed autopsy findings onto an interactive 3D body model. We employ a user-centred design process involving an expert forensic medicine team. We describe the iteration process and the final functionality determined, based on in-depth analyses of forensic clinical workflows, and feedback on the types of complex cases confronting practitioners. FATAL functions include freehand drawing, a layer system for injury categorisation, trajectory plotting, surface area markings, and point-of-interest marking. Relevant external images, such as investigative report or autopsy photographs, can be loaded into the FATAL tool and assigned to individual annotations. The application streamlines workflows, supports template-driven documentation, and collates all forensic data into a single interface. Findings from the digital tool can be exported to a 2D report (PDF). We highlight the advancements in accuracy, efficiency, and reproducibility afforded by a digital tool for forensic autopsy documentation. Potential applications in forensic medical examinations beyond autopsies are described, along with specific areas for extension, such as supporting touch screen and pen inputs, export for 3D printing models and extending the tool's compatibility with custom 3D body models.

Accuracy in patient-reported adverse drug reactions and their recognition: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

The causality assessment tool can be utilized to assist patients in identifying adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

AIM

To evaluate the accuracy of the causality assessment tool for patients identifying ADRs compared to assessments made by pharmacists, and to explore how patients recall and recognize symptoms as ADRs.

METHOD

Mixed methods study consisting of self-administered questionnaires (phase 1) and semi-structured, face-to-face interviews (phase 2) with patients who had experienced ADRs in the past year at a tertiary care hospital in Thailand.

RESULTS

Out of 769 questionnaires, 716 were returned and 622 of these were both valid and had at least one ADR (86.8%). Classification of patient-reported symptoms using the causality assessment tool found 12 (1.9%) highly-probable ADRs, 399 (64.1%) probable ADRs, 207 (33.3%) possible ADRs, and 4 (0.6%) that were not classified as ADRs. There was fair agreement between patient-assessed and pharmacist-assessed causality classifications using the Naranjo algorithm (K = 0.268) and the World Health Organization Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) criteria (K = 0.373). The timing relationship between the occurrence of symptoms and administration of a suspected drug was the most frequently mentioned reason that patients gave for recalling and recognizing suspected ADRs.

CONCLUSION

Promoting the causality assessment tool for use by patients in collaboration with healthcare professionals is likely to enhance patients' ability to correctly identify ADRs and ultimately contribute to increased medication safety.

Clinical impact of medication reviews for community-dwelling patients in primary healthcare

BACKGROUND

A high number of drug-related problems has previously been shown among community-dwelling patients in primary healthcare in Skåne County, Sweden. Medication reviews are one way to solve these problems, but their impact is largely dependent on the process. We aimed to evaluate medication reviews for community-dwelling patients regarding the clinical relevance of the pharmacists' recommendations, and their implementation by general practitioners. We also wanted to investigate if the general practitioners' tendency to act on drug-related problems was correlated to different factors of the process.

METHODS

This was a cohort study, where patients in primary healthcare considered in need of a medication review were selected. Pharmacists identified drug-related problems and gave written recommendations on how to solve the problems to the general practitioner, via the medical record, and in addition in some cases via verbal communication. The clinical relevance of the recommendations was graded according to the Hatoum scale, ranging from one (adverse significance) to six (extremely significant). Descriptive statistics were used regarding the clinical relevance and the general practitioners´ tendency to act on drug-related problems. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between the tendency to act and different factors of the process.

RESULTS

A total of 96.1% of the 384 assessed recommendations from the pharmacists were graded as significant or more for the patient (Hatoum grade 3 or higher). The general practitioners acted on 63.8% of the drug-related problems. Fewer recommendations per patient, as well as verbal communication in addition to written contact, significantly increased the general practitioners' tendency to act on a drug-related problem. No significant association was seen between the tendency to act and the clinical relevance of the recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

The high proportion of clinically relevant recommendations from the pharmacists in this study strengthens medication reviews as an important tool for reducing drug-related problems. Verbal communication between the pharmacist and the general practitioner is important for measures to be taken. Multiple recommendations for the same patient reduced their likelihood to of being addressed by the general practitioner.