Nurse-led medicines' monitoring in care homes, implementing the Adverse Drug Reaction (ADRe) Profile improvement initiative for mental health medicines: An observational and interview study

Fostering an aged care organizational culture that supports innovation

AIM

This study aimed to identify how aged care organizations can foster a culture that supports the implementation of innovation.

INTRODUCTION

The aged care sector must innovate to meet clients' evolving needs and increased regulatory requirements. Given the need to account for the values, beliefs, expectations, and assumptions held by a diverse range of stakeholders, implementing innovations within aged care can be exceptionally complex. Fostering a supportive organizational culture can facilitate the implementation of these critical innovations.

METHODS

Papers from a large scoping review that identified organizational culture as a barrier and/or enabler to implementing innovations in aged care were imported into NVivo. Data relating to how organizations fostered (or could foster) a culture that supported the implementation of innovations were then extracted, inductively coded, interpreted, and grouped into approaches.

RESULTS

Of the 193 papers from the original scoping review, 109 were included in this secondary analysis. From these 109 papers, we identified six key approaches: cultivating collaboration; valuing contributions; ensuring alignment between the organizational vision, culture, and innovation; demonstrating organizational commitment; developing and communicating the implementation plan; and accounting for stability.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study outlines effective approaches that can be used by aged care organizations to cultivate a culture that supports the implementation of innovations. However, these approaches should not be viewed in isolation; rather, they are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Together, these insights offer practical guidance for aged care entities seeking to adapt and evolve through innovation implementation.

SPANISH ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A264.

Top 10 Signs and Symptoms of Psychotropic Adverse Drug Events to Monitor in Residents of Long-Term Care Facilities

OBJECTIVES

To produce a consensus list of the top 10 signs and symptoms suggestive of adverse drug events (ADEs) for monitoring in residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) who use antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, or antidepressants.

DESIGN

A 3-round Delphi study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Geriatricians, psychiatrists, pharmacologists, general practitioners, pharmacists, nurses, and caregivers from 13 Asia Pacific, European, and North American countries.

METHODS

Three survey rounds were completed between April and June 2023. In Round 1, participants indicated their level of agreement on a 9-point Likert scale on whether 41 signs or symptoms identified in a systematic review should be routinely monitored. Participants considered signs and symptoms that reduce quality of life or cause significant harm, are observable or measurable by nurses or care workers, and can be assessed at a single time point. Round 1 statements were included in a list for prioritization in Round 3 if ≥ 70% of participants responded ≥7 on the Likert scale. Statements were excluded if ≤ 30% of participants responded ≥7. In Round 2, participants indicated their level of agreement with statements that did not reach initial consensus, plus amended statements based on Round 1 participant feedback. Round 2 statements were included in Round 3 if ≥ 50% of the participants responded ≥7 on the Likert scale. In Round 3, participants prioritized the signs and symptoms.

RESULTS

Forty-four participants (93.6%) completed all 3 rounds. Four of 41 signs and symptoms reached consensus for inclusion after Round 1, and 9 after Round 2. The top 10 signs and symptoms prioritized in Round 3 were recent falls, daytime drowsiness or sleepiness, abnormal movements (eg, shaking or stiffness), confusion or disorientation, balance problems, dizziness, postural hypotension, reduced self-care, restlessness, and dry mouth.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The top 10 signs and symptoms provide a basis for proactive monitoring for psychotropic ADEs.

A systematic integrative review of specialized nurses' role to establish a culture of patient safety: A modelling perspective

AIMS

To understand specialized nurses' role in the culture of patient safety and their ability to promote and enforce it within healthcare.

DESIGN

A systematic integrative review using the approach of Whittemore and Knafl.

METHODS

Systematic literature search for qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies, followed by data evaluation, quality assessment, analysis and research synthesis with a narrative perspective. Findings were contextualized within a 'framework for understanding the development of patient safety culture'.

DATA SOURCES

Searches were conducted in PubMed [including MEDLINE], Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science and EMBASE from Jan 2013 until Sep 2023.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies published in English from six different countries were selected and used for research synthesis. Diverse enabling factors and enacting behaviours influencing specialized nurses' roles to promote patient safety culture were identified, mainly focusing on nurses' workload, professional experiences and organizational commitment. Patient safety outcomes focused on medication management, infection prevention, surveillance process in critical care, oversight on quality and safety of nurses' practice, patient care management, continuity of care, adherence to the treatment plan and implementation of a specialized therapeutic procedure.

CONCLUSION

Specialized nurses can make a significant contribution to promote patient safety culture and support organizational initiatives to prevent adverse events.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Stronger participation and leadership of specialized nurses in initiatives to improve patient safety culture requires appropriate investments and support by policy makers and managers in terms of resources and training.

IMPACT

There is a gap in existing literature on the contribution that specialized nurses can make in promoting patient safety culture. Review results highlight the importance of interprofessional collaboration and teamwork by involving specialized nurses. They inform healthcare policy makers about recognizing their roles and competencies in patient safety culture. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis. No patient or public contribution.

Factors that influence the implementation of innovation in aged care: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this scoping review is to identify factors that influence the implementation of innovation in aged care.

INTRODUCTION

Aged care is a dynamic sector experiencing rapid change. Implementation of innovations in aged care has received relatively little research attention compared to health care.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review included studies of any design, that examined the implementation of innovations in aged care settings.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, AgeLine, and ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection for studies published between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2022. The titles and abstracts of retrieved citations were screened by two independent reviewers. Full-text articles were screened by one reviewer to determine inclusion. Data were extracted in NVivo using a tool developed by the research team. Factors that influenced implementation were inductively coded, interpreted, and grouped into categories in a series of workshops.

RESULTS

Of the 2530 studies that were screened, 193 were included. Of the included papers, the majority (74%) related to residential aged care, 28% used an implementation theory or framework, and 15% involved consumers. Five key categories of factors influencing implementation were identified: organizational context including resourcing and culture; people's attitudes and capabilities; relationships between people; the intervention and its appropriateness; and implementation actions such as stakeholder engagement and implementation strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings can be used to develop practical resources to support implementation efforts, and highlight the importance of resourcing for successful implementation. Attention to community-based aged care, and greater engagement with theory and community is needed to promote research rigor, relevance and applicability.

Systematic Review of Psychotropic Adverse Drug Event Monitoring Tools for Use in Long-Term Care Facilities

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate properties of psychotropic adverse drug event (ADE) monitoring tools intended for use in long-term care facilities.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 18 years and older in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.

METHODS

Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycInfo were searched from inception to August 2022 for studies reporting the development, validation, or application of tools to monitor psychotropic ADEs. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by 2 authors. Each tool was assessed under the domains of test-retest reliability, interrater reliability, content validity, and construct validity.

RESULTS

Eight studies that described 6 tools were included. Tools were developed in Wales (n = 2), United States (n = 1), Ireland (n = 1), Canada (n = 1), and Singapore (n = 1). Tools monitored 4 to 95 items related to antipsychotics (n = 6 tools), antidepressants (n = 4), benzodiazepines or hypnotics (n = 4), antiepileptics (n = 4), and dementia medications (n = 1). Tools commonly monitored sedation, tiredness, or sleepiness (n = 6); falls (n = 4); and tremor or extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 4). Tools were designed for application by nurses (n = 4), during family conferences (n = 1), and by general medical practitioners before repeat prescribing (n = 1). Two tools were reported to require 10 to 60 minutes to administer. Four tools were determined to have adequate content validity and 2 tools adequate interrater reliability. No tools reported test-retest reliability or construct validity.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Six published psychotropic ADE monitoring tools are heterogeneous in design and intended application. Existing tools are predominately designed for application by nurses with or without direct involvement of the wider multidisciplinary team. Further research is needed into models of care that facilitate psychotropic ADE monitoring in the long-term care facility setting, and the extent to which application of specific tools is associated with reduced medication-related harm.

Actual drug-related harms in residential aged care facilities: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Older people in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) have a high risk of safety issues and concerns about the potential quality of care received. This narrative review investigates the types of actual drug-related harms, their prevalence, reporting of any standard definitions for these harms, and their identification methods.

AREAS COVERED

The authors conducted a systematic search on Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, and PubMed from March 2001 to March 2021. This narrative review included all types of studies targeting aged care residents aged 65 years and above with actual drug-related harms.

EXPERT OPINION

The prevalence of actual drug-related harms in residents ranged from 0.07% to 63.0%. Falls, drug-drug interactions, neuropsychiatric symptoms, anaphylaxis, urinary tract infection, hypoglycemia, hypokalaemia, and acute kidney injury are the most common drug-related harms in older residents. Psychotropic drugs are the most common drug class implicated in these harms. Evidence related to the association between individual psychotropic drugs and injury, or harm is also lacking. Due to the variation in study duration, reported prevalence, identification methods, and absence of a definition for actual drug-related harms in most studies, further research is mandated to understand the prevalence and clinical implications of drug-related harms in older residents.

The listed, delisted, and sustainability of therapeutic medicines for dementia patients: the study is specific to South Korea

The Dementia Management Act (DMA) came into effect on August 4, 2011, in South Korea. Diagnosis and medication were rapidly performed for dementia in a short time. We investigated the cardiac effects of increased drug prescription following DMA. We observed a correlation between Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and anti-AD drug (AAD) groups from 2010 to 2019 on the National Health Insurance System (NHIS) of South Korea. This study investigated the increase and decrease in deaths of AD patients with AAD. We analysed the mortality per 100,000 population with the R² Calculator. Moreover, we made the up or down datum line for the simple decision on the listed, delisted, and sustainable drug examined by a linear equation and R². We observed that life expectancy was diminished by AAD in Sorokdo National Hospital. In the NHIS, donepezil and rivastigmine increased the number of deaths decided on R² > 0.75. Memantine was sustainable. We could not decide on galantamine because it is one of the other groups. We made a straightforward decision-maker of delisted, listed, or sustainable criteria based on mortality and datum line.

Clinical Impact of Implementing a Nurse-Led Adverse Drug Reaction Profile in Older Adults Prescribed Multiple Medicines in UK Primary Care: A Study Protocol for a Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial

(1) Aims: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) particularly affect older people prescribed multiple medicines. The professional bodies of nursing, medicine and pharmacy have issued guidelines on identification and management of ADRs; however, ADRs continue to account for ~10% unplanned hospital admissions in the UK. Current methods of ADR identification and management could be improved by multidisciplinary collaboration involving nurses. The aim of this study is to examine the impact of implementing the nurse-led Adverse Drug Reaction (ADRe) Profile in UK primary care. (2) Design: A pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT) followed by qualitative interviews in a sequential mixed-methods study. (3) Methods: For the cluster RCT, 60 patients aged ≥65 prescribed ≥5 regular medicines for long-term conditions will be recruited, 10 in each of 6 general practices. The intervention arm (n = 30) will complete the ADRe Profile, whilst the control participants (n = 30) continue to receive usual, standard care. Primary outcomes will include clinical impact on patients, benefit and prescription changes. On completion of the RCT, participants will be invited to semi-structured qualitative interviews, to evaluate the impact of the ADRe Profile from stakeholders’ perspectives, and to describe the contextual factors relevant to ADRe implementation. (4) Results: The findings of this study will evaluate the effectiveness of the ADRe Profile in identifying and resolving potential ADRs in primary care. Trial registration: This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT04663360, date of registration—29 November 2021 (date of initial registration: 26 November 2020), protocol version 2, dated 8 January 2021.

The NUPHAC-EU Framework for Nurses' Role in Interprofessional Pharmaceutical Care: Cross-Sectional Evaluation in Europe

Clear role descriptions promote the quality of interprofessional collaboration. Currently, it is unclear to what extent healthcare professionals consider pharmaceutical care (PC) activities to be nurses’ responsibility in order to obtain best care quality. This study aimed to create and evaluate a framework describing potential nursing tasks in PC and to investigate nurses’ level of responsibility. A framework of PC tasks and contextual factors was developed based on literature review and previous DeMoPhaC project results. Tasks and context were cross-sectionally evaluated using an online survey in 14 European countries. A total of 923 nurses, 240 physicians and 199 pharmacists responded. The majority would consider nurses responsible for tasks within: medication self-management (86–97%), patient education (85–96%), medication safety (83–95%), monitoring adherence (82–97%), care coordination (82–95%), and drug monitoring (78–96%). The most prevalent level of responsibility was ‘with shared responsibility’. Prescription management tasks were considered to be nurses’ responsibility by 48–81% of the professionals. All contextual factors were indicated as being relevant for nurses’ role in PC by at least 74% of the participants. No task nor contextual factor was removed from the framework after evaluation. This framework can be used to enable healthcare professionals to openly discuss allocation of specific (shared) responsibilities and tasks.

Nurses and Pharmaceutical Care: Interprofessional, Evidence-Based Working to Improve Patient Care and Outcomes

Pharmaceutical care necessitates significant efforts from patients, informal caregivers, the interprofessional team of health care professionals and health care system administrators. Collaboration, mutual respect and agreement amongst all stakeholders regarding responsibilities throughout the complex process of pharmaceutical care is needed before patients can take full advantage of modern medicine. Based on the literature and policy documents, in this position paper, we reflect on opportunities for integrated evidence-based pharmaceutical care to improve care quality and patient outcomes from a nursing perspective. Despite the consensus that interprofessional collaboration is essential, in clinical practice, research, education and policy-making challenges are often not addressed interprofessionally. This paper concludes with specific advises to move towards the implementation of more interprofessional, evidence-based pharmaceutical care.

Perspectives of nurses' role in interprofessional pharmaceutical care across 14 European countries: A qualitative study in pharmacists, physicians and nurses

OBJECTIVES

To understand healthcare professionals' experiences and perceptions of nurses' potential or ideal roles in pharmaceutical care (PC).

DESIGN

Qualitative study conducted through semi-structured in-depth interviews.

SETTING

Between December 2018 and October 2019, interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals of 14 European countries in four healthcare settings: hospitals, community care, mental health and long-term residential care.

PARTICIPANTS

In each country, pharmacists, physicians and nurses in each of the four settings were interviewed. Participants were selected on the basis that they were key informants with broad knowledge and experience of PC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All interviews were conducted face to face. Each country conducted an initial thematic analysis. Consensus was reached through a face-to-face discussion of all 14 national leads.

RESULTS

340 interviews were completed. Several tasks were described within four potential nursing responsibilities, that came up as the analysis themes, being: 1) monitoring therapeutic/adverse effects of medicines, 2) monitoring medicines adherence, 3) decision making on medicines, including prescribing 4) providing patient education/information. Nurses' autonomy varied across Europe, from none to limited to a few tasks and emergencies to a broad range of tasks and responsibilities. Intended level of autonomy depended on medicine types and level of education. Some changes are needed before nursing roles can be optimised and implemented in practice. Lack of time, shortage of nurses, absence of legal frameworks and limited education and knowledge are main threats to European nurses actualising their ideal role in PC.

CONCLUSIONS

European nurses have an active role in PC. Respondents reported positive impacts on care quality and patient outcomes when nurses assumed PC responsibilities. Healthcare professionals expect nurses to report observations and assessments. This key patient information should be shared and addressed by the interprofessional team. The study evidences the need of a unique and consensus-based PC framework across Europe.

Prevalence of adverse drug reactions in the primary care setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) represent a major cause of iatrogenic morbidity and mortality in patient care. While a substantial body of work has been undertaken to characterise ADRs in the hospital setting, the overall burden of ADRs in the primary care remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence of ADRs in the primary care setting and factors affecting the heterogeneity of the estimates.

METHODS

Studies were identified through searching of Medline, Embase, CINAHL and IPA databases. We included observational studies that reported information on the prevalence of ADRs in patients receiving primary care. Disease and treatment specific studies were excluded. Quality of the included studies were assessed using Smyth ADRs adapted scale. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimate. Potential source of heterogeneity, including age groups, ADRs definitions, ADRs detection methods, study setting, quality of the studies, and sample size, were investigated using sub-group analysis and meta-regression.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies with a total study population of 1,568,164 individuals were included. The pooled prevalence of ADRs in the primary care setting was 8.32% (95% CI, 7.82, 8.83). The percentage of preventable ADRs ranged from 12.35-37.96%, with the pooled estimate of 22.96% (95% CI, 7.82, 38.09). Cardiovascular system drugs were the most commonly implicated medication class. Methods of ADRs detection, age group, setting, and sample size contributed significantly to the heterogeneity of the estimates.

CONCLUSION

ADRs constitute a significant health problem in the primary care setting. Further research should focus on examining whether ADRs affect subsequent clinical outcomes, particularly in high-risk therapeutic areas. This information may better inform strategies to reduce the burden of ADRs in the primary care setting.

Did we do everything we could have? Nurses' contributions to medicines optimization: A mixed-methods study

AIM

To explore UK professionals' interpretations of medicines optimization and expansion of nurses' roles.

DESIGN

This mixed-methods study sought professionals' views on nurses' involvement, competency and engagement in monitoring patients for adverse effects of medicines, monitoring adherence, prescribing and patient education.

METHOD

An online survey and interviews were undertaken with nurses, doctors and pharmacists in Wales and England, May 2018 to July 2019.

RESULTS

In all, 220 nurses, 17 doctors and 62 pharmacists responded to the online survey, and 24 professionals were interviewed. Nurses were divided over extending their roles, with 123/220 (55.9%) wishing to extend roles in monitoring patients for possible adverse drug reactions (ADRs), 111/220 (50.5%) in adherence monitoring, 121/220 (55.0%) in prescribing and 122/220 (55.4%) in patient education. The best-qualified nurses were the most willing to increase involvement in monitoring patients for ADRs (aOR 13.00, 1.56-108.01). Interviews revealed that both nurses and doctors assumed the other profession was undertaking this monitoring. Respondents agreed that increasing nurses' involvement in medicines optimization would improve patient care, but expressed reservations about nurses' competencies. Collaboration between nurses and doctors was suboptimal (rated 7/10 at best) and between nurses and pharmacists even more so (6/10 at best).

CONCLUSION

Juxtaposition of datasets identified problems with medicines optimization: although most respondents agreed that increasing nurses' involvement would positively impact practice, their educational preparation was a barrier. Only ~50% of nurses were willing to expand their roles to fill the hiatus in care identified and ensure that at least one profession was taking responsibility for ADR monitoring.

IMPACT

To improve multiprofessional team working and promote patient safety, nurse leaders should ensure patients are monitored for possible ADRs by at least one profession. Initiatives expanding nurses' roles in medicines optimization and prescribing might be best targeted towards the more educated nurses, who have multidisciplinary support.

Medical error reporting among doctors and nurses in a Nigerian hospital: A cross-sectional survey

AIM

To compare doctors' and nurses' perceptions of factors influencing medical error reporting.

BACKGROUND

In Nigeria, there is limited information on determinants of error reporting and systems.

METHODS

From the total workforce (N = 600), 140 nurses and 90 doctors were selected by random sampling and completed the questionnaire February to March 2017.

RESULTS

All 140 nurses and 90 doctors approached responded. Inter-professional differences in response to sentinel events showed that 55/140, 39.3% nurses and 48/90, 53.3% doctors would never report wrong medicines administered and 49/138, 35.5% nurses and 35/90, 38.9% doctors would never report a haemolytic transfusion error. Some respondents (72/140, 51.4% nurses vs. 29/90, 32.2% doctors) were unaware of reporting systems. Most (77/140, 55% nurses vs. 48/90, 53.3% doctors) considered these to be ineffective and confounded by a 'blame culture'. Perceived barriers included lack of confidentiality; facilitators included clear guidelines about protection from litigation.

CONCLUSIONS

Error reporting is suboptimal. Nurses and doctors have a minimal common understanding of barriers to error reporting and demonstrate inconsistent practice.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

Suboptimal reporting of serious adverse events has implications for patient safety. Managers need to prioritize education in adverse events, clarify reporting procedures and divest the organisation of a 'blame culture'.

A Systematic Review of the Legal Considerations Surrounding Medicines Management

This study explores the legal considerations surrounding medicines management, providing a synthesis of existing knowledge. An integrative systematic review of the current international knowledge was performed. The search encompassed the online databases of PubMed (including Medline), Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science using MeSH terms and relevant keywords relating to the legal considerations of medicines management in healthcare settings. The search process led to the identification of 6051 studies published between 2010 and 2020, of which six articles were found to be appropriate for data analysis and synthesis based on inclusion criteria. Research methods were varied and included qualitative interviews, mixed-methods designs, retrospective case reports and cross-sectional interrupted time-series analysis. Their foci were on the delegation of medicines management, pharmacovigilance and reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) before and after legislation by nurses, physicians and pharmacists, medico-legal litigation, use of forced medication and the prescription monitoring program. Given the heterogenicity of the studies in terms of aims and research methods, a meta-analysis could not be performed and, therefore, our review findings are presented narratively under the categories of 'healthcare providers' education and monitoring tasks', 'individual and shared responsibility', and 'patients' rights'. This review identifies legal aspects surrounding medicines management, including supervision and monitoring of the effects of medicines; healthcare providers' knowledge and attitudes; support and standardised tools for monitoring and reporting medicines' adverse side effects/ADRs; electronic health record systems; individual and shared perceptions of responsibility; recognition of nurses' roles; detection of sentinel medication errors; covert or non-voluntary administration of medication, and patient participation.

Nobody ever questions-Polypharmacy in care homes: A mixed methods evaluation of a multidisciplinary medicines optimisation initiative

BACKGROUND

Nurse-led monitoring of patients for signs and symptoms associated with documented 'undesirable effects' of medicines has potential to prevent avoidable harm, and optimise prescribing.

INTERVENTION

The Adverse Drug Reaction Profile for polypharmacy (ADRe-p) identifies and documents putative adverse effects of medicines commonly prescribed in primary care. Nurses address some problems, before passing ADRe-p to pharmacists and prescribers for review, in conjunction with prescriptions.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated changes in: the number and nature of residents' problems as recorded on ADRe-p; prescription regimens; medicines optimisation: and healthcare costs. We explored aetiologies of problems identified and stakeholders' perspectives.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

In three UK care homes, 19 residents completed the study, December 2018 to May 2019. Two service users, three pharmacists, six nurses gave interviews.

METHODS

This mixed-method process evaluation integrated data from residents' ADRe-ps and medicines charts, at the study's start and 5-10 weeks later.

RESULTS

We recruited three of 27 homes approached and 26 of 45 eligible residents; 19 completed ADRe-p at least twice. Clinical gains were identified for 17/19 residents (mean number of symptoms 3 SD 1.67, range 0-7). Examples included management of: pain (six residents), seizures (three), dyspnoea (one), diarrhoea (laxatives reduced, two), falls (two of five able to stand). One or more medicine was de-prescribed or dose reduced for 12/19 residents. ADRe administration and review cost ~£30 in staff time. ADRe-p helped carers and nurses bring residents' problems to the attention of prescribers.

IMPLICATIONS

ADRe-p relieved unnecessary suffering. It supported carers and nurses by providing a tool to engage with pharmacists and prescribers, and was the only observable strategy for multidisciplinary team working around medicines optimisation. ADRe-p improved care by: a) regular systematic checks and problem documentation; b) information transfer from care home staff to prescribers and pharmacists; c) recording changes.

REGISTRATION

NLM Identifier NCT03955133; ClinicalTrials.gov.

PRN Medicines Optimization and Nurse Education

Medicines management is a high-risk and error prone process in healthcare settings, where nurses play an important role to preserve patient safety. In order to create a safe healthcare environment, nurses should recognize challenges that they face in this process, understand factors leading to medication errors, identify errors and systematically address them to prevent their future occurrence. ''Pro re nata'' (PRN, as needed) medicine administration is a relatively neglected area of medicines management in nursing practice, yet has a high potential for medication errors. Currently, the international literature indicates a lack of knowledge of both the competencies required for PRN medicines management and the optimum educational strategies to prepare students for PRN medicines management. To address this deficiency in the literature, the authors have presented a discussion on nurses' roles in medication safety and the significance and purpose of PRN medications, and suggest a model for preparing nursing students in safe PRN medicines management. The discussion takes into account patient participation and nurse competencies required to safeguard PRN medication practice, providing a background for further research on how to improve the safety of PRN medicines management in clinical practice.

Looking for the "Little Things": A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Medicines Monitoring for Older People Using the ADRe Resource

Advances in medicines have increased the effectiveness of treatments and the social and cultural authority of doctors. However, as prescribing has become the dominant modality of treatment, the “pharmaceuticalization” of medical practice has often resulted in treatment “at a distance”, with doctors having limited contact with patients. Older and poorer people, who are socially distanced from medical prescribers, suffer more adverse drug reactions (ADRs) than the general population. A team approach to checking patients systematically for ADRs, as detailed in manufacturers’ literature, can minimise medication errors, but regular review is rare. This paper explains the benefits of medicines monitoring to protect older patients from iatrogenic harm, such as over-sedation, falls, or drug-induced Parkinsonism. We show how multidisciplinary initiatives to optimise prescribing can be supported by using a recognised resource—the adverse drug reaction profile (ADRe). The profile identifies and documents patients’ signs and symptoms of putative ADRs. Better monitoring allows professionals to adjust prescribing and respond to identified problems with agility. Implementation of systematic monitoring will require changes to the regulatory regime and better inter-professional cooperation. Providing carers, nurses and pharmacists with a structured system to monitor patients would democratise relevant medical knowledge and help address ageism and the socio-economic health divide.

Respiratory concerns of gabapentin and pregabalin: What does it mean to the pharmacovigilance systems in developing countries?

Gabapentin and pregabalin, commonly known as gabapentinoids, have been widely used globally. This paper highlights the serious breathing problems due to using gabapentin and pregabalin which was warned by the United States Food and Drug Administration on December, 2019. In this article, we tried to recommend suggestions for controlling these adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Safety reports of gabapentin and pregabalin should be obtained from concerned manufacturers and reviewed for respiratory depression effects. There should be strict prescription monitoring and drug use evaluation studies. Concurrent use of gabapentin and pregabalin with other respiratory depressants such as opioids should be strictly monitored. Educating patients can help in the early detection of ADRs due to gabapentin and pregabalin. Anecdotal reports on these medications should be encouraged.

Respiratory concerns of gabapentin and pregabalin: What does it mean to the pharmacovigilance systems in developing countries?

Gabapentin and pregabalin, commonly known as gabapentinoids, have been widely used globally. This paper highlights the serious breathing problems due to using gabapentin and pregabalin which was warned by the United States Food and Drug Administration on December, 2019. In this article, we tried to recommend suggestions for controlling these adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Safety reports of gabapentin and pregabalin should be obtained from concerned manufacturers and reviewed for respiratory depression effects. There should be strict prescription monitoring and drug use evaluation studies. Concurrent use of gabapentin and pregabalin with other respiratory depressants such as opioids should be strictly monitored. Educating patients can help in the early detection of ADRs due to gabapentin and pregabalin. Anecdotal reports on these medications should be encouraged.

PRN Medicines Management for Psychotropic Medicines in Long-Term Care Settings: A Systematic Review

Many medications are prescribed and administered PRN (pro re nata, as needed). However, there are few integrative reviews to inform PRN psychotropic medication use in long-term care facilities and nursing or care homes. Accordingly, this integrative systematic review aimed to improve our understanding of PRN medicines management with a focus on psychotropic medications (antipsychotics, sedatives, anxiolytics, and hypnotics) in long-term care settings. Keywords relating to PRN in English, Norwegian, and Spanish were used, and articles published between 2009 and 2019 were retrieved. Based on the inclusion criteria, eight articles were used for data analysis and synthesis. This review offers a description of PRN prescription and administration of psychotropic medications in long-term care. Variations were observed in the management of PRN psychotropic medications based on residents’ underlying health conditions and needs, duration of use, and changes between medications and doses. Neither the reasons for PRN prescription and administration nor the steps taken to identify and manage any associated adverse reactions or adverse drug events were reported. Further initiatives are needed to improve PRN medicines management to explore factors that affect PRN prescription and administration and to develop appropriate PRN guidelines to prevent harm and improve the safety of people living in long-term care facilities.