Development of clinical pharmacy programs integrated into patient care pathways using adverse event risks

Increasing the number of pharmacist-led medication order reviews using the available workforce: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Due to staffing constraints, several hospitals have defined targeting strategies for pharmacist-led medication order review, leaving non-targeted patients exposed to potential harmful drug-related problems (DRPs). Using targeting criteria to stratify medication order review level (level 1 (L1): orders, basic patient characteristics; level 2 (L2) or comprehensive medication order review: orders, patient characteristics, medical records, laboratory results) could make it possible to save time and increase the overall number of medication order reviews. This study aims to define targeting criteria to stratify medication order review level and estimate the time saved for the performance of additional medication order reviews.

METHOD

This retrospective single-centre study included all medication order reviews performed in 2020; DRPs were collected to assess the medication order review level required to detect them. Logistic regressions were performed to define patient characteristics associated with L2. These targeting criteria were applied to the cohort to estimate the time saved and the number of additional medication order reviews which could have been performed using this approach.

RESULTS

2478 DRPs were reported; 54.2% (1343/2748) could have been detected using an L1 medication order review (representing 48.2% of the patients (829/1721)). L2 medication order reviews were significantly associated with age ≥65 years, male, and renal clearance <60 mL/min (OR≥75yo=1.79; OR65-74yo=1.74; ORfemale=0.74; OR30-59mL/min=1.67; OR<30mL/min=2.62; p<0.05). Sex being a confounding factor, only age and renal clearance were used as targeting criteria. The time saved was estimated at 274 hours per year, leading to an additional 1720 medication order reviews (54 hospital beds).

CONCLUSION

The proposed approach would maintain a satisfying level of safety and quality for patients, by performing an L2 medication order review for targeted patients based on age and renal clearance, while improving medication order review coverage with an L1 medication order review for non-targeted patients, using the available workforce.

Implementation assessment of a patient personalized clinical pharmacy programme (5P project) into orthogeriatric care pathway

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The orthogeriatric path (hip-fractured elderly patients) is composed of several transition points (emergency surgery, orthopaedic, geriatric and rehabilitation units). The intervention of clinical pharmacists can ensure the continuity of patients' drug management during their hospital stay. The aim of the study was to assess the implementation of clinical pharmacy activities in an orthogeriatric pathway, regarding its impact on medication error prevention, the healthcare professionals' and patients' satisfaction, and the estimated associated pharmaceutical workload.

METHODS

Participants were aged 75 or older and managed for proximal femoral fracture. Their admission prescription was reviewed. If they were evaluated at high risk of adverse event (AE), medication reconciliation (MedRec) and pharmaceutical interviews (admission, discharge, and targeted on oral anticoagulant) were added at different steps of their care pathway. The achievement and duration of each clinical pharmacy activity were recorded. The number of pharmaceutical interventions (PI) made during prescription review, and unintentional discrepancies (UID) identified during MedRec were collected. A satisfaction questionnaire was sent to patients and healthcare professionals.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Among 455 included patients, 284 patients were considered at high risk of AE. Clinical pharmacy activity achievement rates varied between 12% and 98%. A total of 622 PI and 333 UID were identified. The overall patients' and healthcare professionals' satisfaction was rated from 63% to 100%. The total workload was estimated at 376 h: on average 16 min per prescription review, 43 min per admission MedRec, 26 min per discharge MedRec and 17 to 25 minutes per interview.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of the programme showed a high potential of drug management securing. To sustain it, additional pharmaceutical human resources and high-performance computing tools are needed.

How a Patient Personalised Clinical Pharmacy Programme Can Secure Therapeutic Care in an Orthogeriatric Care Pathway (5P Project)?

Background

A new model was developed for integrating a personalised clinical pharmacy programme (5P project) into the orthogeriatric care pathway.

Objective

To secure the therapeutic care of orthogeriatric patients.

Design and Setting

Prospective descriptive study in a multisite teaching hospital from June 2019 to January 2020.

Subjects

Patients aged ≥75 years admitted for hip fracture.

Methods

A prescription review was performed for all patients at inclusion. Other clinical pharmacy activities (additional prescription review, pharmaceutical interviews, medication reconciliation) were dedicated to “high-risk” patients. Potential medication errors (ME), either pharmaceutical interventions (PI) or unintentional discrepancies (UID), were recorded. The potential clinical impact of PI was evaluated by a pluriprofessional expert panel using a validated tool.

Results

In the 455 patients included, 955 potential ME were detected, that is ≥1 potential ME for 324/455 (71%) patients. In acute care, 561 PI were formulated during prescription review for 440/455 (97%) patients and 348/561 (62%) were accepted by physicians. Medication reconciliation was performed for 213 patients, 316 UID were identified. In rehabilitation units, a second prescription review was performed for 112/122 (92%) “high-risk” patients, leading to 61 PI. The clinical impact was evaluated for 519/622 (83%) PI. A consensus was obtained for 310/519 (60%) PI: 147/310 (47%) were rated as having minor clinical impact, 138/310 (45%) moderate, 22/310 (7%) major, 2/310 (0.6%) vital, and 1/310 (0.3%) null.

Conclusion

The 5P project secured the orthogeriatric care pathway by detecting a great number of potential ME, including PI mostly considered as having a significant clinical impact.