Pilot of a National Inpatient Medication Chart in Australia: improving prescribing safety and enabling prescribing training

To prescribe or not to prescribe? A review of the Prescribing Competencies Framework for dentistry

OBJECTIVES

Dentists in Australia are the second largest prescriber group, and are generally not formally taught how to prescribe. The objective of this review is to describe the Prescribing Competencies Framework and its relevance to dentistry.

DATA

The four-model stage of prescribing by Coombes and colleagues, and the seven competencies within the Prescribing Competencies Framework devised by the Australian National Prescribing Service MedicineWise, are discussed and applied to dentistry.

SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Each of the seven competencies are analysed and detailed in the context of clinical dental practice. Competencies 1-5 describe the skillset and tasks required by dentists to safely prescribe, whereas Competencies 6 and 7 describe the clinical environment and recommended resources to support dentists to prescribe safely and effectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Prescribing Competencies Framework provides an overview of safe and effective prescribing. Prescribing is a process, and a separate skillset to clinical dentistry. The process involves information gathering, clinical assessment, effective communication and review of the patient. Access to timely and appropriate resources and relevant electronic sources of health information for clinicians are important to provide the support required for better informed prescribing decisions. The framework describes a patient-centered prescribing process, and ultimately prescribing should be a shared decision between the dentist and the patient.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Safe and effective prescribing is an integral part of dentistry and dentists are the second largest prescriber group. However, dentists display high rates of inappropriate and unnecessary prescribing, and to minimise errors, the Prescribing Competencies Framework has been established. This article details how the Framework applies to clinical practice dentistry.

Can a novel constructivist theory-informed feedback intervention reduce prescribing errors ? A pre-post study

CONTEXT

Medical interns (interns) find prescribing challenging and many report lacking readiness when commencing work. Errors in prescribing puts patients' safety at risk. Yet error rates remain high, despite education, supervision and pharmacists' contributions. Feedback on prescribing may improve performance. Yet, work-based prescribing feedback practices focus on rectifying errors. We aimed to explore if prescribing can be improved using a theory-informed feedback intervention.

METHODS

In this pre-post study, we designed and implemented a constructivist-theory informed prescribing feedback intervention, informed by Feedback-Mark 2 Theory. Interns commencing internal medicine terms in two Australian teaching hospitals were invited to engage in the feedback intervention. Their prescribing was evaluated by comparing errors per medication order of at least 30 orders per intern. Pre/baseline (weeks 1-3) were compared with post intervention (weeks 8-9). Interns' baseline prescribing audit findings were analysed and discussed at individualised feedback sessions. These sessions were with a clinical pharmacologist (Site 1) and a pharmacist educator (Site 2).

RESULTS

Eighty eight intern's prescribing over five 10-week terms was analysed from two hospitals. The frequency of prescribing errors significantly reduced at both sites after the intervention, across all five terms (p < 0.001).There were initially 1598 errors in 2750 orders (median [IQR] 0.48 [0.35-0.67] errors per order) and after the intervention 1113 errors in 2694 orders (median [IQR] 0.30 [0.17-0.50] errors per order).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest interns' prescribing practices may improve as a result of constructivist -theory learner centred, informed feedback with an agreed plan. This novel intervention, contributed, to a reduction in interns' prescribing errors. This study suggests new strategies for improving prescribing safety should include the design and implementation of theory-informed feedback interventions.

The All Wales Medicines Strategy Group: 18 years' experience of a national medicines optimisation committee

AIMS

To review the medicines optimisation activities of the All Wales Medicines Strategy Group (AWMSG), a committee established in 2002 to advise the Welsh Government on "all matters related to prescribing". Although AWMSG conducts other activities (e.g., health technology appraisal for medicines), we focus here on its role in advising on medicines optimisation.

METHODS

Prescribing indicators have been used in Wales to measure change, together with data on volumes and costs of medicines dispensed. A range of improvement strategies have been categorised under the "four Es", namely educational initiatives, economic incentives, "engineering" and "enforcement".

RESULTS

AWMSG has helped health professionals in NHS Wales to reduce harm and waste, and to reduce inappropriate local or regional duplication and variation. Specific initiatives include the achievement of major cost savings by supporting increased generic prescribing and an "invest to save" approach related to prescribing of hypnotics and tranquillisers, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and proton pump inhibitors. AWMSG also successfully commissioned the introduction of a single national in-patient medication chart for Wales in 2004. Ongoing priorities include a focus on reducing prescribing of certain medicines deemed "low value for prescribing" and on optimising the use of biosimilar medicines.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 2002, AWMSG has acted as a national medicines optimisation committee in Wales. From the outset, pharmacists and clinical pharmacologists have collaborated closely and shared their complementary expertise to make a much greater contribution to the safe, effective and cost-effective use of medicines than either group could have achieved by working separately.

Assessing the quality of medication documentation: development and feasibility of the MediDocQ instrument for retrospective chart review in the hospital setting

OBJECTIVE

The medication process requires clear and transparent documentation in patient records. Incomplete or incorrect medication documentation may contribute to inappropriate clinical decision-making and adverse events. To comprehensively assess the quality of in-hospital medication documentation, we developed a retrospective chart review (RCR) instrument. We report on the development process, the feasibility of the instrument and describe our application of the instrument to a sample of patient records.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using an RCR instrument to evaluate paper-based, non-standardised prescription and medication administration charts (MediDocQ).

SETTING

Two German university hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Records from 1361 patients admitted between April and July 2015 were evaluated.

METHODS

The MediDocQ development process comprised six consecutive stages: focused literature review, web-based search, initial patient record screening, review by project advisory board, focus groups with professionals and pilot testing. The final 54-item RCR instrument covers three key components of medication documentation: (1) completeness of documented information (including prescription, medication administration and pro re nata (PRN) medication), (2) quality of transcriptions and (3) compliance with chart structure, legibility, handling of deletions and chart corrections. Descriptive statistics are presented as mean values, SD, median and interquartile ranges for individual items.

RESULTS

Overall, 33 out of 54 items resulted in mean values above 0.75, indicating high-quality medication documentation. Documentation quality was particularly compromised for verbal and PRN orders (which involve more steps than standard orders) and when documentation was not completed at the same time as medication administration.

CONCLUSIONS

MediDocQ is a patient safety instrument that can be used to evaluate the quality of medication documentation and identify components of the process where intervention is required. In our setting, standardisation of medication documentation, particularly regarding medication administration and PRN medication is a priority.

The safety of computerised prescribing in hospitals

The implementation of computerised prescribing can result in large reductions in prescribing error rates. The flow-on effects to patient outcomes are not well studied

The reduction in errors is dependent on prescribers becoming proficient in using the electronic prescribing system. All potential safety benefits are therefore not expected to be achieved immediately

Electronic prescribing systems introduce new types of errors, most frequently errors in selection. Some of these errors can be prevented if the system is well designed

Computerised decision support embedded in electronic prescribing systems has enormous potential to improve medication safety. However, current support systems have a limited capacity to provide context-relevant advice to prescribers

The MOWER (middle of the week everyone gets a re-chart) pilot study: reducing in-hospital charting error with a multi-intervention

Background

Medication charting errors occur often and can be harmful for patients. Interventions to improve charting errors have demonstrated some success particularly if the intervention uses multiple approaches including an education component. The aim of this pilot study was to determine whether a multi-faceted intervention, including education of junior doctors and weekday re-charting could reduce in-hospital charting error.

Methods

Medication charts (n = 579) of all patients admitted to the medical ward of a medium sized regionally-based hospital in Australia over nine months (baseline and during intervention) were inspected for errors. The intervention ran for three months and involved implementation of a National Inpatient Medication Chart targeted error tool with eight targeted charting requirements which was used for visual reminders in the ward and training of junior doctors. In addition, mid-weekly re-charting (MOWER) was performed by a senior and junior doctor team.

Results

The mean number of charting requirement errors significantly reduced during the intervention by 26% from 4.6 ± 1.3 to 3.4 ± 1.7 per chart (p < 0.001). Re-chart errors reduced on average by 50% (4.4 ± 1.4 to 2.2 ± 1.7 per chart, p < 0.001) and primary (initial) charts by 20% (4.6 ± 1.3 to 3.7 ± 1.5 per chart, p < 0.001) during the intervention. Failing to provide indication information for a drug, prescriber name, and failing to use generic rather than brand names were the categories with the most errors at baseline and also showed the largest error reductions during the intervention.

Conclusions

A multi-intervention including education of junior doctors, visual reminders and midweek re-charting are effective in reducing the rate of charting errors. We advise that a larger study is now conducted using the same multi-intervention strategy in different ward settings to evaluate feasibility and sustainability of this intervention.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4230-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Reducing adverse medication events in mental health: Australian National Survey

AIM

To determine the extent to which evidence-based medication safety practices have been implemented in public and private mental health inpatient units across Australia.

METHODS

The Reducing Adverse Medication Events in Mental Health survey was piloted in Victoria, Australia, in 2015, and rolled out nationally in 2016. In total, 235 mental health inpatient units from all States and Territories in Australia were invited to participate. The survey included questions about the demographics of the mental health unit, evidence-based strategies to improve prescription writing, the administration and dispensing of medicines and pharmacy-led interventions, and also questions relating to consumer engagement in medication management and shared decision-making.

RESULTS

The response rate was 45% (N = 106 units). Overall, the survey found that 57% of the mental health units had fully or partially implemented evidence-based medication safety practices. High levels of implementation (80%) were reported for the use of standardized medication charts such as the National Inpatient Medication Chart as a way to improve medication prescription writing. Most (71%) of the units were using standardized forms for recording medication histories, and 56% were using designated forms for Medication Management Plans. However, less than one-fifth of the units had implemented electronic medication management systems, and the majority of units still relied on paper-based documentation systems.Interventions to improve medicine administration and dispensing were not highly utilized. Individual patient-based medication distribution systems were fully implemented in only 9% of the units, with a high reliance (81%) on ward stock or imprest systems. Tall Man lettering for labelling was implemented in only one-third of the units.Pharmacy services were well represented in mental health units, with 80% having access to onsite pharmacist services providing assessments of current medications and clinical review services, adverse drug reaction reporting and management services, patient and carer education and counselling, and medicines information services. However, pharmacists were involved in only half of medical reconciliations. Their involvement in post-discharge follow-up was limited to 4% of units.

CONCLUSIONS

Gaps in medication safety practices included limited use of individual patient supply systems for medication distribution, a high reliance on ward stock systems and high reliance on paper-based systems for medication prescribing and administration. With regards to service provision, clinical pharmacist involvement in medical reconciliation services, therapeutic drug monitoring and interdisciplinary ward rounds should be increased. Discharge and post-discharge services were major gaps in service provision.

Paediatric antimicrobial stewardship and safe prescribing: an assessment of medical staff knowledge and behaviour

Objective

Determine baseline knowledge of antimicrobial stewardship, and safe prescribing among junior medical officers, monitor their level of participation in interactive education during protected teaching time and assess day-to-day prescribing behaviours over the subsequent 3-month period.

Methods

A voluntary and anonymous survey of all non-consultant level medical officers was conducted with the use of an audience response system during mandatory face-to-face orientation sessions at a tertiary paediatric hospital. Routine prescribing audits monitored compliance with national and locally derived quality use of medicines indicators.

Results

Eighty-six percent of medical officers participated by responding to at least one question (171/200). Response rate for individual questions ranged between 31% and 78%. Questions that addressed adverse drug reactions, documentation and monitoring for empiric antibiotics and the error-prone abbreviations IU and U were correctly answered by over 90% of participants. Other non-standard and error-prone abbreviations were less consistently identified. In practice, 68% of patients had complete adverse drug reaction documentation (113/166). Error-prone abbreviations were identified on 5% of audited medication orders (47/976), approximately half included a documented indication and intended dose.

Conclusions

Participants demonstrated a good understanding of safe prescribing and antimicrobial stewardship. Audits of prescribing identified potential discrepancies between prescribing knowledge and behaviours.

Variation in Gentamicin Dosing and Monitoring in Pediatric Units across New South Wales

INTRODUCTION

Gentamicin is an aminoglycoside antibiotic with broad-spectrum bactericidal activity and is widely used in pediatric units to treat infection with susceptible organisms. This study aimed to describe the dosage regimen for gentamicin and approach to its therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) among the pediatric units within the state of New South Wales (NSW).

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent electronically to representatives of 40 pediatric units in NSW, requesting details of each unit's gentamicin dosing and TDM policy.

RESULTS

A total of 35 units responded to the survey. The majority (63%) of the units used a dose of 7.5 mg/kg of gentamicin in patients with normal renal function. More than half of the units (54%) did not have a local gentamicin dosing protocol and relied on other sources for dosing regimens. Dosing responses varied from a dose of 6 mg/kg once daily for patients more than 10 years of age to 7 mg/kg once daily on day 1, followed by 5 mg/kg once daily for patients over 10 years of age. For TDM of gentamicin, 63% of units indicated use of trough levels and 23% units used the Hartford Nomogram.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant variation exists in clinical practice among pediatric units in NSW on gentamicin dosing and TDM guidelines. There is an urgent need for collaboration among nursing, medical, and pharmacy experts to achieve consensus to develop and adopt statewide uniform guidelines on gentamicin dosing and TDM.

Feasibility Study of Interventions to Reduce Medication Omissions Without Documentation: Recall and Check Study

We conducted a feasibility study to test an intervention to reduce medication omissions without documentation using nurse-initiated recall cards and medication chart checking at handover. No significant difference in the omission rate per 100 medications was found, although after adjusting for hospital and patient age, a significant effect occurred in the intervention group (n = 262 patients) compared with the control group (n = 272). This intervention may reduce medication omissions without documentation, requiring further study within larger samples.

Use of the Delphi technique to determine safety features to be included in a neonatal and paediatric prescription chart

BACKGROUND

Neonatal and paediatric patients are especially vulnerable to serious injury as a result of medication errors due to their small size, physiological immaturity and limited compensatory abilities. The prescription chart remains an essential form of communication of prescribing decisions and instructions. Modifications to the safety features of prescription charts have been shown to reduce the frequency of medication errors.

OBJECTIVE

To determine, using the Delphi technique, which safety features should be included in the inpatient neonatal and paediatric prescription chart to help minimise the risk of medication errors associated with the use of the chart.

SETTING

Acute general hospital in Malta.

METHOD

A two-round modified e-Delphi process was conducted. The Delphi questionnaire was developed from a mapping process, a literature search and references supporting the literature review. It comprised 155 safety features for consensus. The Delphi panel consisted of nine doctors, five nurses and four pharmacists. Participants were asked to rate their agreement to the inclusion of these features in the local chart using a three-point Likert scale, and to add further comments as necessary at the end of each section. In the second round, participants were given the opportunity to change their individual response in view of the groups' response.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

This was set at a 70% level of agreement.

RESULTS

Results from each round were analysed to provide the percentage frequencies and number of participants who chose each point from the Likert scale provided, and the response count for each safety feature. A ≥70% consensus level was achieved on: 115 safety features in Round 1 (total: 155 safety features) and 23 safety features in Round 2 (total: 40 safety features) while only 17 safety features did not achieve consensus at the end of the process.

CONCLUSION

Consensus was achieved on 133 safety features to be included in the neonatal and paediatric prescription chart. Five safety features achieved consensus disagreement for their inclusion in the chart. Identifying the appropriate safety features forms part of an essential strategy to reduce the incidence of medication errors associated with the use of the chart in these patients.

Initiatives promoting seamless care in medication management: an international review of the grey literature

BACKGROUND

Patients' transition between hospital and community is a high-risk period for the occurrence of medication-related problems.

AIM OF THE REVIEW

The objective was to review initiatives, implemented at national and regional levels in seven selected countries, aiming at improving continuity in medication management upon admission and hospital discharge.

METHOD

We performed a structured search of grey literature, mainly through relevant websites (scientific, professional and governmental organizations). Regional or national initiatives were selected. For each initiative data on the characteristics, impact, success factors and barriers were extracted. National experts were asked to validate the initiatives identified and the data extracted.

RESULTS

Most initiatives have been implemented since the early 2000 and are still ongoing. The principal actions include: development and implementation of guidelines for healthcare professionals, national information campaigns, education of healthcare professionals and development of information technologies to share data across settings of care. Positive results have been partially reported in terms of intake into practice or process measures. Critical success factors identified included: leadership and commitment to convey national and local forces, tailoring to local settings, development of a regulatory framework and information technology support. Barriers identified included: lack of human and financial resources, questions relative to responsibility and accountability, lack of training and lack of agreement on privacy issues.

CONCLUSION

Although not all initiatives are applicable as such to a particular healthcare setting, most of them convey very interesting data that should be used when drawing recommendations and implementing approaches to optimize continuity of care.

Balanced prescribing - principles and challenges

Balanced prescribing is a process that recommends a medicine appropriate to the patient's condition and, within the limits created by the uncertainty that attends therapeutic decisions, a dosage regimen that optimizes the balance of benefit to harm. The essential steps in achieving this are (a) careful attention to the history, examination, and investigation of the patient's condition and drug therapy, (b) accurate diagnosis, (c) detailed attention to prescribing the dosage regimen in the light of the therapeutic goal, (d) careful writing of the prescription and (e) regular monitoring of therapy, including attention to beneficial outcomes, adverse reactions, and patient adherence. The two major requirements in determining the dosage regimen are (1) understanding the pathophysiology of a health problem and matching it to the mechanisms of action of the relevant medicines and (2) assessing the benefit to harm balance of the therapy, although the difficulties in doing this in the individual are great. Major challenges in prescribing include provision of adequate education for all prescribers early in their undergraduate training and maintaining their expertise after graduation, obtaining evidence to inform appropriate monitoring of therapy, reducing the incidence of medication errors, and providing high quality information that will at the same time guide prescribing decisions and be sufficiently flexible to allow prescribers to tailor therapy to the needs of the individual patient. Careful attention to all facets of prescribing can improve the chances of benefit, reduce the risks of adverse reactions and interactions, and enhance adherence to therapy.

Perioperative medication management: expanding the role of the preadmission clinic pharmacist in a single centre, randomised controlled trial of collaborative prescribing

OBJECTIVES

Current evidence to support non-medical prescribing is predominantly qualitative, with little evaluation of accuracy, safety and appropriateness. Our aim was to evaluate a new model of service for the Australia healthcare system, of inpatient medication prescribing by a pharmacist in an elective surgery preadmission clinic (PAC) against usual care, using an endorsed performance framework.

DESIGN

Single centre, randomised controlled, two-arm trial.

SETTING

Elective surgery PAC in a Brisbane-based tertiary hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

400 adults scheduled for elective surgery were randomised to intervention or control.

INTERVENTION

A pharmacist generated the inpatient medication chart to reflect the patient's regular medication, made a plan for medication perioperatively and prescribed venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. In the control arm, the medication chart was generated by the Resident Medical Officers.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was frequency of omissions and prescribing errors when compared against the medication history. The clinical significance of omissions was also analysed. Secondary outcome was appropriateness of VTE prophylaxis prescribing.

RESULTS

There were significantly less unintended omissions of medications: 11 of 887 (1.2%) intervention orders compared with 383 of 1217 (31.5%) control (p<0.001). There were significantly less prescribing errors involving selection of drug, dose or frequency: 2 in 857 (0.2%) intervention orders compared with 51 in 807 (6.3%) control (p<0.001). Orders with at least one component of the prescription missing, incorrect or unclear occurred in 208 of 904 (23%) intervention orders and 445 of 1034 (43%) controls (p<0.001). VTE prophylaxis on admission to the ward was appropriate in 93% of intervention patients and 90% controls (p=0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

Medication charts in the intervention arm contained fewer clinically significant omissions, and prescribing errors, when compared with controls. There was no difference in appropriateness of VTE prophylaxis on admission between the two groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered with ANZCTR-ACTR Number ACTRN12609000426280.

Preparing hospital pharmacists to prescribe: stakeholders' views of postgraduate courses

OBJECTIVES

To explore pharmacy stakeholders' views on developing a postgraduate course to prepare hospital pharmacists for collaborative prescribing in Australia.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with pharmacy stakeholders from universities, hospitals and professional organisations (n = 25) to gather views on the content, structure and delivery methods of a possible postgraduate prescribing course for pharmacists. Transcripts were analysed thematically and coded using NVivo software.

KEY FINDINGS

There was strong support for collaborative prescribing as an appropriate role for advanced pharmacist practitioners and acknowledgement that further training is needed to implement this new role. It was proposed that postgraduate training for hospital pharmacists should be based on a national prescribing competency framework and participants highlighted key aspects of the prescribing process in which pharmacists need particular up-skilling: diagnosis, physical assessments, clinical decision-making and consultations. The training model used in the UK was favoured, where candidates undertake university-based study combined with collaborative training with a doctor and a practical assessment of competency.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study have provided valuable information which can provide a pathway for the development of a postgraduate course to prepare Australian hospital pharmacists for prescribing. Future research should focus on uncovering the perceptions of Australian doctors, nurses and policy makers on the training requirements needed for pharmacist prescribing in the hospital setting. Stakeholders' views on pharmacist prescribing training in the community setting could also be explored.

Simple prescribing errors and allergy documentation in medical hospital admissions in Australia and New Zealand

This study aimed to quantify and compare the prevalence of simple prescribing errors made by clinicians in the first 24 hours of a general medical patient's hospital admission. Four public or private acute care hospitals across Australia and New Zealand each audited 200 patients' drug charts. Patient demographics, pharmacist review and pre-defined prescribing errors were recorded. At least one simple error was present on the medication charts of 672/715 patients, with a linear relationship between the number of medications prescribed and the number of errors (r = 0.571, p < 0.001). The four sites differed significantly in the prevalence of different types of simple prescribing errors. Pharmacists were more likely to review patients aged > or = 75 years (39.9% vs 26.0%; p < 0.001) and those with more than 10 drug prescriptions (39.4% vs 25.7%; p < 0.001). Patients reviewed by a pharmacist were less likely to have inadequate documentation of allergies (13.5% vs 29.4%, p < 0.001). Simple prescribing errors are common, although their nature differs from site to site. Clinical pharmacists target patients with the most complex health situations, and their involvement leads to improved documentation.