Primary Care Medication Safety Surveillance with Integrated Primary and Secondary Care Electronic Health Records: A Cross-Sectional Study

Approaches to improving patient safety in integrated care: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aimed to establish the approaches employed to improving patient safety in integrated care for community-dwelling adults with long-term conditions.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

SETTING

All care settings.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Systematic searches of seven academic and grey literature databases for studies published between 2000 and 2021. At the full-text review stage both the first and second reviewer (SW) independently assessed full texts against the eligibility criteria and any discrepancies were discussed.

RESULTS

Overall, 24 studies were included in the review. Two key priorities for safety across care boundaries for adults with long-term conditions were falls and medication safety. Approaches for these priorities were implemented at different levels of an integrated care system. At the micro-level, approaches involved care primarily in the home setting provided by multi-disciplinary teams. At the meso-level, the focus was on planning and designing approaches at the managerial/organisational level to deliver multi-disciplinary care. At the macro-level, system-wide approaches included integrated care records, training and education and the development of care pathways involving multiple organisations. Across the included studies, evaluation of these approaches was undertaken using a wide range of process and outcome measures to capture patient harm and contributory factors associated with falls and medication safety.

CONCLUSIONS

For integrated care initiatives to fulfil their promise of improving care for adults with long-term conditions, approaches to improve patient safety need to be instituted across the system, at all levels to support the structural and relational aspects of integrated care as well as specific risk-related safety improvements.

Exploring the challenges to safer prescribing and medication monitoring in prisons: A qualitative study with health care staff

Introduction

Research suggests that patients who are prisoners experience greater morbidity, increased health inequalities and frequent preventable harm, compared to the general population. Little is known about the process and influencing factors for safe prescribing in the unique prison environment, which may limit the development efforts to improve the quality of care in prisons. This study aimed to understand the process and challenges associated with prescribing in prisons, explore the causes and impact of these challenges, and explore approaches to improve prescribing safety in prisons.

Methods

Grounded theory informed data collection and analysis of a nominal group discussion by seven participants and semi-structured telephone interviews with twenty prison healthcare staff, including GPs, pharmacists, psychiatrists and nurses.

Findings

The underlying complexity of prescribing in prison settings increased the level of challenge and influenced the safety of this process. Multiple contributors to the challenges of safe prescribing were identified (comprising governance and policy; the prison structure; staff retention, training and skill mix; IT systems and interface; polypharmacy and co-morbidity; tradability and patient behaviour) with overarching constructs of variations in practice/policy and the influence of prison culture. Participants identified measures to address these challenges through multi-disciplinary collaborative working, increased consistency in processes, and the need for more innovation and education/training.

Conclusions

Our study highlighted that healthcare provision in prisons is unique and needs to tailor the care provided to patients without enforcing a model focused on primary, secondary or tertiary care. Participants emphasised a necessary shift in workplace culture and behaviour change to support improvements. The COM-B model of behaviour change may be effectively applied to develop interventions in organisations that have in-depth understanding of their own unique challenges.

Under-identification of cancer outpatients at risk of malnutrition: are we making the most of anthropometric data?

In oncological outpatient settings, patients often require nutritional support after they have developed malnutrition. A delayed dietetic referral can lead to increased difficulties in providing therapies and surgery, and to poorer patient outcomes. The audit described in this article aimed to assess the frequency and completeness of patient record documentation of anthropometric measurements in a day treatment unit (DTU) in a single cancer centre in the UK. The underlying goal was to improve anthropometry monitoring procedures to ensure that documentation is sufficient to indicate weight loss and, hence, allow timely referrals for nutrition support. The results show that, for over 80% of patients, it was not possible to identify a weight trend between the latest two treatments received at the hospital. The audit findings highlight the need to improve malnutrition monitoring and to ensure patient records contain updated and accurate anthropometric measurements in order to facilitate medical staff to recognise early malnutrition risk and refer for appropriate nutritional support when needed.

An Observational Retrospective Matched Cohort Study of Healthcare Resource Utilisation and Costs in UK Patients with Moderate to Severe Osteoarthritis Pain

Introduction

Using data from patients residing in Salford, UK, we aimed to compare healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) and direct healthcare costs between patients with moderate to severe (M-S) or severe osteoarthritis (OA) pain and those without OA.

Methods

Patients with a M-S OA pain event within a period of chronic pain were indexed from the Salford Integrated Record (SIR) between 2010 and 2017. Patients with a severe pain event formed an OA subcohort. Patients in each OA pain cohort were independently matched to patients without OA, forming two control cohorts. HCRU, prescribed analgesic drugs, and total direct costs per UK standardised tariffs were calculated for the year post-index. Multivariable models were used to identify drivers of healthcare cost.

Results

The M-S OA pain and control cohorts each comprised 3123 patients; the severe OA pain and control cohorts each comprised 1922 patients. Patients in both OA pain cohorts had a significantly higher mean number of general practitioner encounters, inpatient, outpatient, and accident and emergency visits, and were prescribed a broader range of analgesic drugs in the year post-index than respective controls. Mean healthcare costs of all types were significantly higher in the M-S and severe OA pain cohorts vs controls (total: M-S £2519 vs £1379; severe £3389 vs £1397). Paracetamol (M-S: 40% of patients had at least one prescription; severe: 50%) and strong opioids (34% and 59%) were the analgesics most prescribed to patients with OA pain. In all cohorts, multivariable models showed that a higher age at index, the presence of gout, osteoporosis, type 2 diabetes, or coronary artery disease, significantly contributed towards higher healthcare costs.

Conclusion

In the population of Salford, UK, patients with M-S OA pain had significantly higher annual HCRU and costs compared with matched controls without OA; generally, these were even higher in patients with severe OA pain.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-022-00431-2.

Evaluating the safety of mental health-related prescribing in UK primary care: a cross-sectional study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)

Background

Most patients with mental illness are managed in primary care, yet there is a lack of data exploring potential prescribing safety issues in this setting for this population.

Objectives

Examine the prevalence of, between-practice variation in, and patient and practice-level risk factors for, 18 mental health-related potentially hazardous prescribing indicators and four inadequate medication monitoring indicators in UK primary care.

Method

Cross-sectional analyses of routinely collected electronic health records from 361 practices contributing to Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database. The proportion of patients ‘at risk’ (based on an existing diagnosis, medication, age and/or sex) triggering each indicator and composite indicator was calculated. To examine between-practice variation, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and median OR (MOR) were estimated using two-level logistic regression models. The relationship between patient and practice characteristics and risk of triggering composites including 16 of the 18 prescribing indicators and four monitoring indicators were assessed using multilevel logistic regression.

Results

9.4% of patients ‘at risk’ (151 469 of 1 611 129) triggered at least one potentially hazardous prescribing indicator; between practices this ranged from 3.2% to 24.1% (ICC 0.03, MOR 1.22). For inadequate monitoring, 90.2% of patients ‘at risk’ (38 671 of 42 879) triggered at least one indicator; between practices this ranged from 33.3% to 100% (ICC 0.26, MOR 2.86). Patients aged 35–44, females and those receiving more than 10 repeat prescriptions were at greatest risk of triggering a prescribing indicator. Patients aged less than 25, females and those with one or no repeat prescription were at greatest risk of triggering a monitoring indicator.

Conclusion

Potentially hazardous prescribing and inadequate medication monitoring commonly affect patients with mental illness in primary care, with marked between-practice variation for some indicators. These findings support health providers to identify improvement targets and inform development of improvement efforts to reduce medication-related harm.

Concept libraries for automatic electronic health record based phenotyping: A review

Introduction

Electronic health records (EHR) are linked together to examine disease history and to undertake research into the causes and outcomes of disease. However, the process of constructing algorithms for phenotyping (e.g., identifying disease characteristics) or health characteristics (e.g., smoker) is very time consuming and resource costly. In addition, results can vary greatly between researchers. Reusing or building on algorithms that others have created is a compelling solution to these problems. However, sharing algorithms is not a common practice and many published studies do not detail the clinical code lists used by the researchers in the disease/characteristic definition. To address these challenges, a number of centres across the world have developed health data portals which contain concept libraries (e.g., algorithms for defining concepts such as disease and characteristics) in order to facilitate disease phenotyping and health studies.

Objectives

This study aims to review the literature of existing concept libraries, examine their utilities, identify the current gaps, and suggest future developments.

Methods

The five-stage framework of Arksey and O'Malley was used for the literature search. This approach included defining the research questions, identifying relevant studies through literature review, selecting eligible studies, charting and extracting data, and summarising and reporting the findings.

Results

This review identified seven publicly accessible Electronic Health data concept libraries which were developed in different countries including UK, USA, and Canada. The concept libraries (n = 7) investigated were either general libraries that hold phenotypes of multiple specialties (n = 4) or specialized libraries that manage only certain specialities such as rare diseases (n = 3). There were some clear differences between the general libraries such as archiving data from different electronic sources, and using a range of different types of coding systems. However, they share some clear similarities such as enabling users to upload their own code lists, and allowing users to use/download the publicly accessible code. In addition, there were some differences between the specialized libraries such as difference in ability to search, and if it was possible to use different searching queries such as simple or complex searches. Conversely, there were some similarities between the specialized libraries such as enabling users to upload their own concepts into the libraries and to show where they were published, which facilitates assessing the validity of the concepts. All the specialized libraries aimed to encourage the reuse of research methods such as lists of clinical code and/or metadata.

Conclusion

The seven libraries identified have been developed independently and appear to replicate similar concepts but in different ways. Collaboration between similar libraries would greatly facilitate the use of these libraries for the user. The process of building code lists takes time and effort. Access to existing code lists increases consistency and accuracy of definitions across studies. Concept library developers should collaborate with each other to raise awareness of their existence and of their various functions, which could increase users’ contributions to those libraries and promote their wide-ranging adoption.

Description of pharmacists' reported interventions to prevent prescribing errors among in hospital inpatients: a cross sectional retrospective study

Background

Prescribing errors (PEs) are a common cause of morbidity and mortality, both in community practice and in hospitals. Pharmacists have an essential role in minimizing and preventing PEs, thus, there is a need to document the nature of pharmacists’ interventions to prevent PEs. The purpose of this study was to describe reported interventions conducted by pharmacists to prevent or minimize PEs in a tertiary care hospital.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of the electronic medical records data was conducted to identify pharmacists’ interventions related to reported PEs. The PE-related data was extracted for a period of six-month (April to September 2017) and comprised of patient demographics, medication-related information, and the different interventions conducted by the pharmacists. The study was carried in a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh region. The study was ethically reviewed and approved by the hospital IRB committee. Descriptive analyses were appropriately conducted using the IBM SPSS Statistics.

Results

A total of 2,564 pharmacists’ interventions related to PEs were recorded. These interventions were reported in 1,565 patients. Wrong dose (54.3 %) and unauthorized prescription (21.9 %) were the most commonly encountered PEs. Anti-infectives for systemic use (49.2 %) and alimentary tract and metabolism medications (18.2 %) were the most common classes involved with PEs. The most commonly reported pharmacists’ interventions were dose adjustments (44.0 %), restricted medication approvals (21.9 %), and therapeutic duplications (11 %).

Conclusions

In this study, PEs occurred commonly and pharmacists’ interventions were critical in preventing possible medication related harm to patients. Care coordination and prioritizing patient safety through quality improvement initiatives at all levels of the health care system can play a key role in this quality improvement drive. Future studies should evaluate the impact of pharmacists’ interventions on patient outcomes.

Evaluation of a pharmacist-led actionable audit and feedback intervention for improving medication safety in UK primary care: An interrupted time series analysis

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the impact of the pharmacist-led Safety Medication dASHboard (SMASH) intervention on medication safety in primary care.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

SMASH comprised (1) training of clinical pharmacists to deliver the intervention; (2) a web-based dashboard providing actionable, patient-level feedback; and (3) pharmacists reviewing individual at-risk patients, and initiating remedial actions or advising general practitioners on doing so. It was implemented in 43 general practices covering a population of 235,595 people in Salford (Greater Manchester), UK. All practices started receiving the intervention between 18 April 2016 and 26 September 2017. We used an interrupted time series analysis of rates (prevalence) of potentially hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring, comparing observed rates post-intervention to extrapolations from a 24-month pre-intervention trend. The number of people registered to participating practices and having 1 or more risk factors for being exposed to hazardous prescribing or inadequate blood-test monitoring at the start of the intervention was 47,413 (males: 23,073 [48.7%]; mean age: 60 years [standard deviation: 21]). At baseline, 95% of practices had rates of potentially hazardous prescribing (composite of 10 indicators) between 0.88% and 6.19%. The prevalence of potentially hazardous prescribing reduced by 27.9% (95% CI 20.3% to 36.8%, p < 0.001) at 24 weeks and by 40.7% (95% CI 29.1% to 54.2%, p < 0.001) at 12 months after introduction of SMASH. The rate of inadequate blood-test monitoring (composite of 2 indicators) reduced by 22.0% (95% CI 0.2% to 50.7%, p = 0.046) at 24 weeks; the change at 12 months (23.5%) was no longer significant (95% CI -4.5% to 61.6%, p = 0.127). After 12 months, 95% of practices had rates of potentially hazardous prescribing between 0.74% and 3.02%. Study limitations include the fact that practices were not randomised, and therefore unmeasured confounding may have influenced our findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The SMASH intervention was associated with reduced rates of potentially hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring in general practices. This reduction was sustained over 12 months after the start of the intervention for prescribing but not for monitoring of medication. There was a marked reduction in the variation in rates of hazardous prescribing between practices.

Understanding the utilisation of a novel interactive electronic medication safety dashboard in general practice: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Improving medication safety is a major concern in primary care settings worldwide. The Salford Medication safety dASHboard (SMASH) intervention provided general practices in Salford (Greater Manchester, UK) with feedback on their safe prescribing and monitoring of medications through an online dashboard, and input from practice-based trained clinical pharmacists. In this study we explored how staff working in general practices used the SMASH dashboard to improve medication safety, through interactions with the dashboard to identify potential medication safety hazards and their workflow to resolve identified hazards.

METHODS

We used a mixed-methods study design involving quantitative data from dashboard user interaction logs from 43 general practices during the first year of receiving the SMASH intervention, and qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with 22 pharmacists and physicians from 18 practices in Salford.

RESULTS

Practices interacted with the dashboard a median of 12.0 (interquartile range, 5.0-15.2) times per month during the first quarter of use to identify and resolve potential medication safety hazards, typically starting with the most prevalent hazards or those they perceived to be most serious. Having observed a potential hazard, pharmacists and practice staff worked together to resolve that in a sequence of steps (1) verifying the dashboard information, (2) reviewing the patient's clinical records, and (3) deciding potential changes to the patient's medicines. Over time, dashboard use transitioned towards regular but less frequent (median of 5.5 [3.5-7.9] times per month) checks to identify and resolve new cases. The frequency of dashboard use was higher in practices with a larger number of at-risk patients. In 24 (56%) practices only pharmacists used the dashboard; in 12 (28%) use by other practice staff increased as pharmacist use declined after the initial intervention period; and in 7 (16%) there was mixed use by both pharmacists and practice staff over time.

CONCLUSIONS

An online medication safety dashboard enabled pharmacists to identify patients at risk of potentially hazardous prescribing. They subsequently worked with GPs to resolve risks on a case-by-case basis, but there were marked variations in processes between some practices. Workload diminished over time as it shifted towards resolving new cases of hazardous prescribing.

Quality improvement of prescribing safety: a pilot study in primary care using UK electronic health records

Background

Quality improvement (QI) is a priority for general practice, and GPs are expected to participate in and provide evidence of QI activity. There is growing interest in harnessing the potential of electronic health records (EHR) to improve patient care by supporting practices to find cases that could benefit from a medicines review.

Aim

To develop scalable and reproducible prescribing safety reports using patient-level EHR data.

Design and setting

UK general practices that contribute de-identified patient data to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD).

Method

A scoping phase used stakeholder consultations to identify primary care QI needs and potential indicators. QI reports containing real data were sent to 12 pilot practices that used Vision GP software and had expressed interest. The scale-up phase involved automating production and distribution of reports to all contributing practices that used both Vision and EMIS software systems. Benchmarking reports with patient-level case review lists for two prescribing safety indicators were sent to 457 practices in December 2017 following the initial scale-up (Figure 2).

Results

Two indicators were selected from the Royal College of General Practitioners Patient Safety Toolkit following stakeholder consultations for the pilot phase involving 12 GP practices. Pilot phase interviews showed that reports were used to review individual patient care, implement wider QI actions in the practice, and for appraisal and revalidation.

Conclusion

Electronic health record data can be used to provide standardised, reproducible reports that can be delivered at scale with minimal resource requirements. These can be used in a national QI initiative that impacts directly on patient care.

Modelling the interactive behaviour of users with a medication safety dashboard in a primary care setting

OBJECTIVE

To characterise the use of an electronic medication safety dashboard by exploring and contrasting interactions from primary users (i.e. pharmacists) who were leading the intervention and secondary users (i.e. non-pharmacist staff) who used the dashboard to engage in safe prescribing practices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a 10-month observational study in which 35 health professionals used an instrumented medication safety dashboard for audit and feedback purposes in clinical practice as part of a wider intervention study. We modelled user interaction by computing features representing exploration and dwell time through user interface events that were logged on a remote database. We applied supervised learning algorithms to classify primary against secondary users.

RESULTS

We observed values for accuracy above 0.8, indicating that 80% of the time we were able to distinguish a primary user from a secondary user. In particular, the Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) yielded the highest values of precision (0.88), recall (0.86) and F-measure (0.86). The behaviour of primary users was distinctive in that they spent less time between mouse clicks (lower dwell time) on the screens showing the overview of the practice and trends. Secondary users exhibited a higher dwell time and more visual search activity (higher exploration) on the screens displaying patients at risk and visualisations.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

We were able to distinguish the interactive behaviour of primary and secondary users of a medication safety dashboard in primary care using timestamped mouse events. Primary users were more competent on population health monitoring activities, while secondary users struggled on activities involving a detailed breakdown of the safety of patients. Informed by these findings, we propose workflows that group these activities and adaptive nudges to increase user engagement.

Investigating the epidemiology of medication errors in adults in community care settings. A retrospective cohort study in central Saudi Arabia

Objectives:

To investigate the period prevalence and risk factors for clinically important prescription and monitoring errors among adults managed in community care in Saudi Arabia (SA).

Methods:

This retrospective cohort study used electronic health record (HER) data. A random sample comprising of 2,000 adults (≥18 years old) visiting Family Medicine clinics in King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center (KFSH & RC), Riyadh, SA, was selected. Data collection took 3 months (October December 2017). Descriptive analyses and logistic regression modeling were performed using STATA (version 14) statistical software.

Results:

The overall period prevalence of medication errors over 15 months was 8.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.5-9.7). Risk factors that significantly predicted overall risk of patients experiencing one or more medication errors were: age ≥65 years, male gender, Saudi nationality, and polypharmacy (defined as the concurrent use of ≥5 drugs).

Conclusions:

Clinically important medication errors were commonly observed in relation to both drug prescription and monitoring.

An Analysis of a Twitter Corpus for Training a Medication Intake Classifier

While social media has evolved into a useful resource for studying medication-related information, observational studies of medications have continued to rely on other sources of data. Towards advancing the use of social media data for medication-related observational studies, we analyze an annotated corpus of 27,941 tweets designed for training machine learning algorithms to automatically detect users' medication intake. In particular, we assess how a baseline classifier trained on the general corpus-that is, on various types of medication-performs for specific types. For most types, the classifier performs significantly better than it does overall; however, for nervous system medications, it performs significantly worse. These results suggest that, while the general corpus may have utility for observational studies focusing on most types of medication, studying nervous system medications may benefit from training a classifier exclusively for this type. We will explore this data-level approach in future work.

Developing a learning health system: Insights from a qualitative process evaluation of a pharmacist-led electronic audit and feedback intervention to improve medication safety in primary care

INTRODUCTION

Developments in information technology offer opportunities to enhance medication safety in primary care. We evaluated the implementation and adoption of a complex pharmacist-led intervention involving the use of an electronic audit and feedback surveillance dashboard to identify patients potentially at risk of hazardous prescribing or monitoring of medicines in general practices. The intervention aimed to create a rapid learning health system for medication safety in primary care. This study aimed to explore how the intervention was implemented, adopted and embedded into practice using a qualitative process evaluation.

METHODS

Twenty two participants were purposively recruited from eighteen out of forty-three general practices receiving the intervention as well as clinical commissioning group staff across Salford UK, which reflected the range of contexts in which the intervention was implemented. Interviews explored how pharmacists and GP staff implemented the intervention and how this affected care practice. Data analysis was thematic with emerging themes developed into coding frameworks based on Normalisation Process Theory (NPT).

RESULTS

Engagement with the dashboard involved a process of sense-making in which pharmacists considered it added value to their work. The intervention helped to build respect, improve trust and develop relationships between pharmacists and GPs. Collaboration and communication between pharmacists and clinicians was primarily initiated by pharmacists and was important for establishing the intervention. The intervention operated as a rapid learning health system as it allowed for the evidence in the dashboard to be translated into changes in work practices and into transformations in care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlighted the importance of the combined use of information technology and the role of pharmacists working in general practice settings. Medicine optimisation activities in primary care may be enhanced by the implementation of a pharmacist-led electronic audit and feedback system. This intervention established a rapid learning health system that swiftly translated data from electronic health records into changes in practice to improve patient care. Using NPT provided valuable insights into the ways in which developing relationships, collaborations and communication between health professionals could lead to the implementation, adoption and sustainability of the intervention.

SMASH! The Salford medication safety dashboard

BACKGROUND

Patient safety is vital to well-functioning health systems. A key component is safe prescribing, particularly in primary care where most medications are prescribed. Previous research demonstrated that the number of patients exposed to potentially hazardous prescribing can be reduced by interrogating the electronic health record (EHR) database of general practices and providing feedback to general practitioners in a pharmacist-led intervention. We aimed to develop and roll out an online dashboard application that delivers this audit and feedback intervention in a continuous fashion.

METHOD

Based on initial system requirements we designed the dashboard's user interface over 3 iterations with 6 general practitioners (GPs), 7 pharmacists and a member of the public. Prescribing safety indicators from previous work were implemented in the dashboard. Pharmacists were trained to use the intervention and deliver it to general practices.

RESULTS

A web-based electronic dashboard was developed and linked to shared care records in Salford, UK. The completed dashboard was deployed in all but one (n=43) general practices in the region. By November 2017, 36 pharmacists had been trained in delivering the intervention to practices. There were 135 registered users of the dashboard, with an average of 91 user sessions a week.

CONCLUSION

We have developed and successfully rolled out of a complex, pharmacist-led dashboard intervention in Salford, UK. System usage statistics indicate broad and sustained uptake of the intervention. The use of systems that provide regularly updated audit information may be an important contributor towards medication safety in primary care.

Mindful organizing in patients' contributions to primary care medication safety

Background

There is a need to ensure that the risks associated with medication usage in primary health care are controlled. To maintain an understanding of the risks, health‐care organizations may engage in a process known as “mindful organizing.” While this is typically conceived of as involving organizational members, it may in the health‐care context also include patients. Our study aimed to examine ways in which patients might contribute to mindful organizing with respect to primary care medication safety.

Method

Qualitative focus groups and interviews were carried out with 126 members of the public in North West England and the East Midlands. Participants were taking medicines for a long‐term health condition, were taking several medicines, had previously encountered problems with their medication or were caring for another person in any of these categories. Participants described their experiences of dealing with medication‐related concerns. The transcripts were analysed using a thematic method.

Results

We identified 4 themes to explain patient behaviour associated with mindful organizing: knowledge about clinical or system issues; artefacts that facilitate control of medication risks; communication with health‐care professionals; and the relationship between patients and the health‐care system (in particular, mutual trust).

Conclusions

Mindful organizing is potentially useful for framing patient involvement in safety, although there are some conceptual and practical issues to be addressed before it can be fully exploited in this setting. We have identified factors that influence (and are strengthened by) patients’ engagement in mindful organizing, and as such would be a useful focus of efforts to support patient involvement.

A formative evaluation of the implementation of a medication safety data collection tool in English healthcare settings: A qualitative interview study using normalisation process theory

Background

Reducing medication-related harm is a global priority; however, impetus for improvement is impeded as routine medication safety data are seldom available. Therefore, the Medication Safety Thermometer was developed within England’s National Health Service. This study aimed to explore the implementation of the tool into routine practice from users’ perspectives.

Method

Fifteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with purposely sampled National Health Service staff from primary and secondary care settings. Interview data were analysed using an initial thematic analysis, and subsequent analysis using Normalisation Process Theory.

Results

Secondary care staff understood that the Medication Safety Thermometer’s purpose was to measure medication safety and improvement. However, other uses were reported, such as pinpointing poor practice. Confusion about its purpose existed in primary care, despite further training, suggesting unsuitability of the tool. Decreased engagement was displayed by staff less involved with medication use, who displayed less ownership. Nonetheless, these advocates often lacked support from management and frontline levels, leading to an overall lack of engagement. Many participants reported efforts to drive scale-up of the use of the tool, for example, by securing funding, despite uncertainty around how to use data. Successful improvement was often at ward-level and went unrecognised within the wider organisation. There was mixed feedback regarding the value of the tool, often due to a perceived lack of “capacity”. However, participants demonstrated interest in learning how to use their data and unexpected applications of data were reported.

Conclusion

Routine medication safety data collection is complex, but achievable and facilitates improvements. However, collected data must be analysed, understood and used for further work to achieve improvement, which often does not happen. The national roll-out of the tool has accelerated shared learning; however, a number of difficulties still exist, particularly in primary care settings, where a different approach is likely to be required.

Antipsychotic Prescribing to Patients Diagnosed with Dementia Without a Diagnosis of Psychosis in the Context of National Guidance and Drug Safety Warnings: Longitudinal Study in UK General Practice

Introduction

Policy interventions to address inappropriate prescribing of antipsychotic drugs to older people diagnosed with dementia are commonplace. In the UK, warnings were issued by the Medicines Healthcare products Regulatory Agency in 2004, 2009 and 2012 and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance was published in 2006. It is important to evaluate the impact of such interventions.

Methods

We analysed routinely collected primary-care data from 111,346 patients attending one of 689 general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink to describe the temporal changes in the prescribing of antipsychotic drugs to patients aged 65 years or over diagnosed with dementia without a concomitant psychosis diagnosis from 2001 to 2014 using an interrupted time series and a before-and-after design. Logistic regression methods were used to quantify the impact of patient and practice level variables on prescribing prevalence.

Results

Prescribing of first-generation antipsychotic drugs reduced from 8.9% in 2001 to 1.4% in 2014 (prevalence ratio 2014/2001 adjusted for age, sex and clustering within practices (0.14, 95% confidence interval 0.12–0.16), whereas there was little change for second-generation antipsychotic drugs (1.01, confidence interval 0.94–1.17). Between 2004 and 2012, several policy interventions coincided with a pattern of ups and downs, whereas the 2006 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance was followed by a gradual longer term reduction. Since 2013, the decreasing trend in second-generation antipsychotic drug prescribing has plateaued largely driven by the increasing prescribing of risperidone.

Conclusions

Increased surveillance and evaluation of drug safety warnings and guidance are needed to improve the impact of future interventions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-017-0538-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinical code set engineering for reusing EHR data for research: A review

INTRODUCTION

The construction of reliable, reusable clinical code sets is essential when re-using Electronic Health Record (EHR) data for research. Yet code set definitions are rarely transparent and their sharing is almost non-existent. There is a lack of methodological standards for the management (construction, sharing, revision and reuse) of clinical code sets which needs to be addressed to ensure the reliability and credibility of studies which use code sets.

OBJECTIVE

To review methodological literature on the management of sets of clinical codes used in research on clinical databases and to provide a list of best practice recommendations for future studies and software tools.

METHODS

We performed an exhaustive search for methodological papers about clinical code set engineering for re-using EHR data in research. This was supplemented with papers identified by snowball sampling. In addition, a list of e-phenotyping systems was constructed by merging references from several systematic reviews on this topic, and the processes adopted by those systems for code set management was reviewed.

RESULTS

Thirty methodological papers were reviewed. Common approaches included: creating an initial list of synonyms for the condition of interest (n=20); making use of the hierarchical nature of coding terminologies during searching (n=23); reviewing sets with clinician input (n=20); and reusing and updating an existing code set (n=20). Several open source software tools (n=3) were discovered.

DISCUSSION

There is a need for software tools that enable users to easily and quickly create, revise, extend, review and share code sets and we provide a list of recommendations for their design and implementation.

CONCLUSION

Research re-using EHR data could be improved through the further development, more widespread use and routine reporting of the methods by which clinical codes were selected.

Understanding the implementation and adoption of an information technology intervention to support medicine optimisation in primary care: qualitative study using strong structuration theory

OBJECTIVES

Using strong structuration theory, we aimed to understand the adoption and implementation of an electronic clinical audit and feedback tool to support medicine optimisation for patients in primary care.

DESIGN

This is a qualitative study informed by strong structuration theory. The analysis was thematic, using a template approach. An a priori set of thematic codes, based on strong structuration theory, was developed from the literature and applied to the transcripts. The coding template was then modified through successive readings of the data.

SETTING

Clinical commissioning group in the south of England.

PARTICIPANTS

Four focus groups and five semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 participants purposively sampled from a range of stakeholder groups (general practitioners, pharmacists, patients and commissioners).

RESULTS

Using the system could lead to improved medication safety, but use was determined by broad institutional contexts; by the perceptions, dispositions and skills of users; and by the structures embedded within the technology. These included perceptions of the system as new and requiring technical competence and skill; the adoption of the system for information gathering; and interactions and relationships that involved individual, shared or collective use. The dynamics between these external, internal and technological structures affected the adoption and implementation of the system.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful implementation of information technology interventions for medicine optimisation will depend on a combination of the infrastructure within primary care, social structures embedded in the technology and the conventions, norms and dispositions of those utilising it. Future interventions, using electronic audit and feedback tools to improve medication safety, should consider the complexity of the social and organisational contexts and how internal and external structures can affect the use of the technology in order to support effective implementation.

Understanding the implementation and adoption of a technological intervention to improve medication safety in primary care: a realist evaluation

Background

Monitoring for potentially hazardous prescribing is increasingly important to improve medication safety. Healthcare information technology can be used to achieve this aim, for example by providing access to prescribing data through surveillance of patients’ electronic health records. The aim of our study was to examine the implementation and adoption of an electronic medicines optimisation system that was intended to facilitate clinical audit in primary care by identifying patients at risk of an adverse drug event. We adopted a sociotechnical approach that focuses on how complex social, organisational and institutional factors may impact upon the use of technology within work settings.

Methods

We undertook a qualitative realist evaluation of the use of an electronic medicines optimisation system in one Clinical Commissioning Group in England. Five semi-structured interviews, four focus groups and one observation were conducted with a range of stakeholders. Consistent with a realist evaluation methodology, the analysis focused on exploring the links between context, mechanism and outcome to explain the ways the intervention might work, for whom and in what circumstances.

Results

Using the electronic medicines optimisation system could lead to a number of improved patient safety outcomes including pre-emptively reviewing patients at risk of adverse drug events. The effective use of the system depended upon engagement with the system, the flow of information between different health professionals centrally placed at the Clinical Commissioning Group and those locally placed at individual general practices, and upon variably adapting work practices to facilitate the use of the system. The use of the system was undermined by perceptions of ownership, lack of access, and lack of knowledge and awareness.

Conclusions

The use of an electronic medicines optimisation system may improve medication safety in primary care settings by identifying those patients at risk of an adverse drug event. To fully realise the potential benefits for medication safety there needs to be better utilisation across primary care and with a wider range of stakeholders. Engaging with all potential stakeholders and users prior to implementation of such systems might allay perceptions that the system is owned centrally and increase knowledge of the potential benefits.

What is involved in medicines management across care boundaries? A qualitative study of healthcare practitioners' experiences in the case of acute kidney injury

OBJECTIVES

To examine the role of individual and collective cognitive work in managing medicines for acute kidney injury (AKI), this being an example of a clinical scenario that crosses the boundaries of care organisations and specialties.

DESIGN

Qualitative design, informed by a realist perspective and using semistructured interviews as the data source. The data were analysed using template analysis.

SETTING

Primary, secondary and intermediate care in England.

PARTICIPANTS

12 General practitioners, 10 community pharmacists, 7 hospital doctors and 7 hospital pharmacists, all with experience of involvement in preventing or treating AKI.

RESULTS

We identified three main themes concerning participants' experiences of managing medicines in AKI. In the first theme, challenges arising from the clinical context, AKI is identified as a technically complex condition to identify and treat, often requiring judgements to be made about renal functioning against the context of the patient's general well-being. In the second theme, challenges arising from the organisational context, the crossing of professional and organisational boundaries is seen to introduce problems for the coordination of clinical activities, for example by disrupting information flows. In the third theme, meeting the challenges, participants identify ways in which they overcome the challenges they face in order to ensure effective medicines management, for example by adapting their work practices and tools.

CONCLUSIONS

These themes indicate the critical role of cognitive work on the part of healthcare practitioners, as individuals and as teams, in ensuring effective medicines management during AKI. Our findings suggest that the capabilities underlying this work, for example decision-making, communication and team coordination, should be the focus of training and work design interventions to improve medicines management for AKI or for other conditions.

Appropriate Polypharmacy and Medicine Safety: When Many is not Too Many

The use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy) is increasingly common in middle-aged and older populations. Ensuring the correct balance between the prescribing of ‘many’ drugs and ‘too many’ drugs is a significant challenge. Clinicians are tasked with ensuring that patients receive the most appropriate combinations of medications based on the best available evidence, and that medication use is optimised according to patients’ clinical needs (appropriate polypharmacy). Historically, polypharmacy has been viewed negatively because of the associated medication safety risks, such as drug interactions and adverse drug events. More recently, polypharmacy has been identified as a risk factor for under-prescribing, such that patients do not receive necessary medications and this can also pose risks to patients’ safety and well-being. The negative connotations that have long been associated with the term polypharmacy could potentially be acting as a driving factor for under-prescribing, whereby clinicians are reluctant to prescribe necessary medicines for patients who are already receiving ‘many’ medicines. It is now recognised that the prescribing of ‘many’ medicines can be entirely appropriate in patients with several chronic conditions and that the risks of adverse drug events that have been associated with polypharmacy may be greatly reduced when patients’ clinical context is taken into consideration. In this article, we outline the current perspectives on polypharmacy and make the case for adopting the term ‘appropriate polypharmacy’ in differentiating between the prescribing of ‘many’ drugs and ‘too many’ drugs. We also outline the inherent challenges in doing so and provide recommendations for future clinical practice and research.

Examining variations in prescribing safety in UK general practice: cross sectional study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

STUDY QUESTION

What is the prevalence of different types of potentially hazardous prescribing in general practice in the United Kingdom, and what is the variation between practices?

METHODS

A cross sectional study included all adult patients potentially at risk of a prescribing or monitoring error defined by a combination of diagnoses and prescriptions in 526 general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) up to 1 April 2013. Primary outcomes were the prevalence of potentially hazardous prescriptions of anticoagulants, anti-platelets, NSAIDs, β blockers, glitazones, metformin, digoxin, antipsychotics, combined hormonal contraceptives, and oestrogens and monitoring by blood test less frequently than recommended for patients with repeated prescriptions of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and loop diuretics, amiodarone, methotrexate, lithium, or warfarin.

STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS

49 927 of 949 552 patients at risk triggered at least one prescribing indicator (5.26%, 95% confidence interval 5.21% to 5.30%) and 21 501 of 182 721 (11.8%, 11.6% to 11.9%) triggered at least one monitoring indicator. The prevalence of different types of potentially hazardous prescribing ranged from almost zero to 10.2%, and for inadequate monitoring ranged from 10.4% to 41.9%. Older patients and those prescribed multiple repeat medications had significantly higher risks of triggering a prescribing indicator whereas younger patients with fewer repeat prescriptions had significantly higher risk of triggering a monitoring indicator. There was high variation between practices for some indicators. Though prescribing safety indicators describe prescribing patterns that can increase the risk of harm to the patient and should generally be avoided, there will always be exceptions where the indicator is clinically justified. Furthermore there is the possibility that some information is not captured by CPRD for some practices-for example, INR results in patients receiving warfarin.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

The high prevalence for certain indicators emphasises existing prescribing risks and the need for their appropriate consideration within primary care, particularly for older patients and those taking multiple medications. The high variation between practices indicates potential for improvement through targeted practice level intervention.

FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING

National Institute for Health Research through the Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (grant No GMPSTRC-2012-1). Data from CPRD cannot be shared because of licensing restrictions.