Medication reconciliation and review for older emergency patients requires improvement in Finland

Harmonizing the definition of medication reviews for their collaborative implementation and documentation in electronic patient records: A Delphi consensus study

BACKGROUND

Medication review practices have evolved internationally in a direction in which not only physicians but also other healthcare professionals conduct medication reviews according to agreed practices. Collaborative practices have increasingly highlighted the need for electronic joint platforms where information on medication regimens and their implementation can be documented, kept updated, and shared.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to harmonize the definition of medication reviews and create a unified conceptual basis for their collaborative implementation and documentation in electronic patient records (definition appellation: collaborative medication review).

METHODS

The study was conducted using the Delphi consensus survey with three interprofessional expert panel rounds in September-December 2020. The consensus rate was set at 80%. Experts assessed the proposed definition of collaborative medication review based on an international and national inventory of medication review definitions. The expert panel (n = 41) involved 12 physicians, 13 pharmacists, 10 nurses, and six information management professionals. The range of response rates for the rounds was 63-88%.

RESULTS

The experts commented on which of the pre-selected items (n = 75) characterizing medication reviews should be included in the definition of collaborative medication review. The items were divided into the following five themes and 51 of them reached consensus: 1) Actions included in the collaborative medication review (n = 24/24), 2) Settings where the review should be conducted (n = 5/5), 3) Situations where the review should be considered as needed and carried out (n = 10/11), 4) Prioritization of top five benefits to be achieved by the review and 5) Prioritization of top five patient groups to whom the review should be targeted.

CONCLUSIONS

A strong interprofessional consensus was reached on the definition of collaborative medication review. The most challenging was to identify individual patient groups benefiting from the review.

Developing an In-House Comprehensive Medication Review Training Program for Clinical Pharmacists in a Finnish Hospital Pharmacy

Long-term continuing education programs have been a key factor in shifting toward more patient-centered clinical pharmacy services. This narrative review aims to describe the development of Helsinki University Hospital (HUS) Pharmacy's in-house Comprehensive Medication Review Training Program (CMRTP) and how it has impacted clinical pharmacy services in HUS. The CMRTP was developed during the years 2017-2020. The program focuses on developing the special skills and competencies needed in comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs), including interprofessional collaboration and pharmacotherapeutic knowledge. The program consists of two modules: (I) Pharmacist-Led Medication Reconciliation, and (II) CMR. The CMRTP includes teaching sessions, self-learning assignments, medication reconciliations, medication review cases, CMRs, a written final report, and a self-assessment of competence development. The one-year-long program is coordinated by a clinical teacher. The program is continuously developed based on the latest guidelines in evidence-based medicine and international benchmarking in cooperation with the University of Helsinki. With the CMRTP, we have adopted a more patient-centered role for our clinical pharmacists and remarkably expanded the services. This program may be benchmarked in other countries where the local education system does not cover clinical pharmacy competence well enough and in hospitals where the clinical pharmacy services are not yet very patient-oriented.

A pilot study about methods to reduce prescription errors in a chemotherapy day unit - Aspects to consider in pharmacist verification process

INTRODUCTION

Prescribing errors can happen unintentionally during the prescribing process, or when choosing a treatment therapy. Prescribing errors have the highest prevalence amongst common error types related to chemotherapy medication in outpatient settings. According to the Joint Commission International (JCI), prescriptions should be reviewed for appropriateness by someone else than the prescriber or practitioner to prevent medication errors.

AIM

The study was aimed to map out the existing type and amount of occurring deviations in prescribing and to clarify the current chemotherapy prescribing practices at the Comprehensive Cancer Center at Helsinki University Hospital. Similar research has not been published in Finland before.

METHODS AND PATIENTS

The researcher selected patients randomly from the daily outpatient attendance list following a predetermined numerical order. Data was collected by conducting a medication verification review in line with the JCI guidance by a clinical pharmacist the day before the patient's clinic appointment using the available medical documentation. A clinical pharmacist evaluated findings from prescriptions and contacted an oncologist if the findings were considered clinically significant.

RESULTS

A clinical pharmacist verified prescriptions from 101 patients for appropriateness and found discrepancies in four percent of the prescriptions (n = 4/101). The oncologist approved 50 percent of the suggested amendments by the pharmacist as clinically significant (n = 2/4). The study revealed that patient's regular home medications were not always correctly recorded into the database, so verification of medicine interactions could not be trusted as completely accurate. It took on average 16 min per patient to perform a medication verification review. The process was slowed down by the lack of detailed enough protocols for this purpose and the current patient care record system not having structural formatting of data entry.

CONCLUSIONS

Verification of prescriptions provides a tool to identify prescribing discrepancies and to prevent unintended medication errors affecting patients. The development of detailed protocols and guidelines, as well as an appropriate training program, would support pharmacists in compiling clinical medication reviews for chemotherapy patients. More research is needed to further develop the operating model in Finland. Information gathered from this study can be used for identifying training requirements.

Why medicines are used differently from prescribed: a protocol for a prospective patient-oriented observational case study to investigate reasons for non-adherence in primary care

INTRODUCTION

Patients do not always tell the physician if they have used medicines differently from prescribed. The challenges that patients experience in medication self-management and adherence have been prioritised globally as among the most crucial factors influencing the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapies.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study protocol presents a new patient-oriented method to investigate reasons for non-adherence using pharmacist-conducted medication reconciliation in a primary care clinic as data collection point. By interviewing, the pharmacist will learn how the patient has been taking the prescribed medicines and whether any non-prescription medicines and food supplements have been used for self-medication. The pharmacist will document the findings of the conversation to the electronic patient record in a structured format. The pharmacist will collect data related to the characteristics of the patients and outpatient clinics, patients' diseases and medications, and medication discrepancies. These data will be analysed for descriptive statistics to identify (1) the number of discrepancies between the physician's prescription orders and the patient's self-reported use of the medicines, (2) what kind of discrepancies there are, (3) which are high-risk medicines in terms of non-adherence and (4) why medicines were taken differently from prescribed; based on the results, (5) a preliminary conceptual model of patient-reported reasons for non-adherence will be constructed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05167578.

Implementing a New Electronic Health Record System in a University Hospital: The Effect on Reported Medication Errors

Closed-loop electronic medication management systems (EMMS) have been seen as a potential technology to prevent medication errors (MEs), although the research on them is still limited. The aim of this paper was to describe the changes in reported MEs in Helsinki University Hospital (HUS) during and after implementing an EPIC-based electronic health record system (APOTTI), with the first features of a closed-loop EMMS. MEs reported from January 2018 to May 2021 were analysed to identify changes in ME trends with quantitative analysis. Severe MEs were also analysed via qualitative content analysis. A total of 30% (n = 23,492/79,272) of all reported patient safety incidents were MEs. Implementation phases momentarily increased the ME reporting, which soon decreased back to the earlier level. Administration and dispensing errors decreased, but medication reconciliation, ordering, and prescribing errors increased. The ranking of the TOP 10 medications related to MEs remained relatively stable. There were 92 severe MEs related to APOTTI (43% of all severe MEs). The majority of these (55%, n = 53) were related to use and user skills, 24% (n = 23) were technical failures and flaws, and 21% (n = 21) were related to both. Using EMMS required major changes in the medication process and new technical systems and technology. Our medication-use process is approaching a closed-loop system, which seems to provide safer dispensing and administration of medications. However, medication reconciliation, ordering, and prescribing still need to be improved.

Evaluation of medication reconciliation process in internal medicine wards of an academic medical center by a pharmacist: errors and risk factors

Medication reconciliation based on complete medication histories has been introduced to minimize medication errors and its associated healthcare costs in the transitions of care. In this study, to evaluate the routine process of medication reconciliation in an academic medical center, medication history taken at the time of admission by physicians and the first order prescribed in the hospital was compared to a comprehensive reconciliation form filled by a pharmacist using direct interview of the patients and caregivers, patient's insurance records and medication packages they brought from home. Two hundred and fifty-seven patients admitted in the internal wards of an academic medical center between June and September 2019 were investigated. In 6% of the patients, drug history was not included in the medical history form. Other patients were using 8.59 drugs in average, with a mean of 3.55 medication discrepancies in the history-taking process. Most commonly occurring errors were drug omissions (2.23 per patient on average) and incorrect frequency (0.96 per patient on average). There was a mean of 0.7 potentially harmful discrepancies for each patient. The mean number of drug discrepancies in new prescriptions from the hospital was 1.25, and almost half of patients had a potentially harmful discrepancies reordered in the hospital. There was no statistically meaningful relationship between patients' gender, physicians' gender, or the time of history taking and the total number of medication errors. History of ischemic heart disease was significantly associated with higher number of medication errors (p = 0.05). The results suggest that the medication reconciliation process in this academic center is inefficient. Using a systematic approach in medication reconciliation and gathering the best possible medication history, with a pharmacist who has better understanding of drugs' potential interactions and harmful errors can improve this process and prevent such errors in the future.

Developing and piloting a self-assessment tool for medication review competence of practicing pharmacists based on nationally set competence criteria

BACKGROUND

New competence requirements have emerged for pharmacists as a result of changing societal needs towards more patient-centred practices. Today, medication review competence can be considered as basic pharmaceutical competence. Medication review specific competence criteria and tools for self-assessing the competence are essential in building competences and a shared understanding of medication reviews as a collaborative practice. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot a self-assessment tool for medication review competence among practicing pharmacists in Finland.

METHODS

The development of the self-assessment tool was based on the national medication review competence criteria for pharmacists established in Finland in 2017 and piloting the tool among practicing pharmacists in a national online survey in October 2018. The pharmacists self-assessed their medication review competence with a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 for "very poor/not at all" to 5 for "very good".

RESULTS

The internal consistency of the self-assessment tool was high as the range of the competence areas' Cronbach's alpha was 0.953-0.973. The competence areas consisted of prescription review competence (20 items, Cronbach's alpha 0.953), additional statements for medication review competence (11 additional items, Cronbach's alpha 0.963) and medication review as a whole, including both the statements of prescription review and medication review competence (31 items, Cronbach's alpha 0.973). Competence items closely related to routine dispensing were most commonly self-estimated to be mastered by the practicing pharmacists who responded (n = 344), while the more clinical and patient-centred competence items had the lowest self-estimates. This indicates that the self-assessment tool works logically and differentiates pharmacists according to competence. The self-assessed medication review competence was at a very good or good level among more than half (55%) of the respondents (n = 344).

CONCLUSION

A self-assessment tool for medication review competence was developed and validated. The piloted self-assessment tool can be used for regular evaluation of practicing pharmacists' medication review competence which is becoming an increasingly important basis for their contribution to patient care and society.

Clinical and economic impact of medication reconciliation by designated ward pharmacists in a hospitalist-managed acute medical unit

BACKGROUND

Minimizing unintended medication errors after admission is a common goal for clinical pharmacists and hospitalists.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the clinical and economic impact of a medication reconciliation service in a model of designated ward pharmacists working in a hospitalist-managed acute medical unit as part of a multidisciplinary team.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, we compared pharmacist intervention records before and after the implementation of a medication reconciliation service by designated pharmacists. The frequency and type of intervention were assessed and their clinical impact was estimated according to the length of hospital stay and 30-day readmission rate. A cost analysis was performed using the average hourly salary of a pharmacist, cost of interventions (time spent on interventions), and cost avoidance (avoided costs generated by interventions).

RESULTS

After the implementation of the medication reconciliation service, the frequency of pharmacist interventions increased from 3.9% to 22.1% (p < 0.001). Intervention types were also more diverse than those before the implementation. The most common interventions included identifying medication discrepancies between pre-admission and hospitalization (22.7%) and potentially inappropriate medication use in the elderly (13.1%). The median length of hospital stay decreased from 9.6 to 8.9 days (p = 0.024); the 30-day readmission rate declined significantly from 7.8% to 4.8% (p = 0.046). Over two-thirds of interventions accepted by hospitalists were considered clinically significant or greater in severity. The cost difference between avoided cost and cost of interventions was 9838.58 USD in total or 1967.72 USD per month.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a designated pharmacist-led medication reconciliation service had a positive clinical and economic impact in our hospitalist unit.

Collaborative Medication Reviews to Identify Inappropriate Prescribing in Pre-Admission Medications at Emergency Department Short-Term Ward

PURPOSE

Collaborative medication reviews (CMR) have been shown to reduce inappropriate prescribing (IP) in various settings. This study aimed at describing a CMR practice in an emergency department (ED) short-term ward in Finland to investigate IP in pre-admission medications.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pre-admission medications were collaboratively reviewed for all the adult ED admissions within a 5-month study period in 2016. Types of IP were inductively categorized, and descriptive statistics were used to show the incidence and type of IP events.

RESULTS

The pre-admission medications of 855 adult ED patients were reviewed by the pharmacist, with 113 IP events identified in 83 (9.7%) of the patients. The majority (81%, n=67) of these patients were older adults (≥65 years). Of these 94 IP events identified in 67 older patients, 58 (62%) were confirmed by the ED physicians. The following 3 main categories were inductively developed for the types of identified and confirmed IP events: 1) Misprescribing (prescription of medications that significantly increase the risk of adverse drug events); 2) Overprescribing (prescription of medications for which no clear clinical indications exist); and 3) Underprescribing (omission of potentially beneficial medications that are clinically indicated for treatment or prevention of a disease). Misprescribing was the most common type of IP identified (79% of the identified and 72% confirmed IP events). Benzodiazepines (29%) and antidepressants (28%) were involved in 33 out of 58 (57%) confirmed IP events. Medications with strong anticholinergic effects were involved in 19% of the confirmed IP events.

CONCLUSION

The CMR practice was able to identify IP in pre-admission medications of about one-tenth of ED patients. Older patients using benzodiazepines and drugs with strong anticholinergic effects should be paid special attention to ED admissions.

Communication issues contributing to medication incidents: Mixed-method analysis of hospitals' incident reports using indicator phrases based on literature

AIM

To identify the types and frequencies of communication issues (communication pairs, person related, institutional, structural, process and prescription-related issues) detected in medication incident reports and to compare communication issues that caused moderate or serious harm to patients.

BACKGROUND

Communication issues have been found to be among the main contributing factors of medication incidents, thus necessitating communication enhancement.

DESIGN

A sequential exploratory mixed-method design.

METHODS

Medication incident reports from Finland (n = 500) for the year 2015 in which communication was marked as a contributing factor were used as the data source. Indicator phrases were used for searching communication issues from free texts of incident reports. The detected issues were analysed statistically, qualitatively and considering the harm caused to the patient. Citations from free texts were extracted as evidence of issues and were classified following main categories of indicator phrases. The EQUATOR's SRQR checklist was followed in reporting.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight communication pairs were identified, with nurse-nurse (68.2%; n = 341), nurse-physician (41.6%; n = 208) and nurse-patient (9.6%; n = 48) pairs being the most frequent. Communication issues existed mostly within unit (76.6%, n = 383). The most commonly identified issues were digital communication (68.2%; n = 341), lack of communication within a team (39.6%; n = 198), false assumptions about work processes (25.6%; n = 128) and being unaware of guidelines (25.0%; n = 125). Collegial feedback and communication from patients and relatives were the preventing issues. Moderate harm cases were often linked with lack of communication within the unit, digital communication and not following guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The interventions should be prioritised to (a) enhancing communication about work-processes, (b) verbal communication about digital prescriptions between professionals, (c) feedback among professionals and (f) encouraging patients to communicate about medication.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Upon identifying the most harmful and frequent communication issues, interventions to strengthen medication safety can be implemented.

An inventory of collaborative medication reviews for older adults - evolution of practices

Background

Collaborative medication review (CMR) practices for older adults are evolving in many countries. Development has been under way in Finland for over a decade, but no inventory of evolved practices has been conducted. The aim of this study was to identify and describe CMR practices in Finland after 10 years of developement.

Methods

An inventory of CMR practices was conducted using a snowballing approach and an open call in the Finnish Medicines Agency’s website in 2015. Data were quantitatively analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitatively by inductive thematic content analysis. Clyne et al’s medication review typology was applied for evaluating comprehensiveness of the practices.

Results

In total, 43 practices were identified, of which 22 (51%) were designed for older adults in primary care. The majority (n = 30, 70%) of the practices were clinical CMRs, with 18 (42%) of them being in routine use. A checklist with criteria was used in 19 (44%) of the practices to identify patients with polypharmacy (n = 6), falls (n = 5), and renal dysfunction (n = 5) as the most common criteria for CMR. Patients were involved in 32 (74%) of the practices, mostly as a source of information via interview (n = 27, 63%). A medication care plan was discussed with the patient in 17 practices (40%), and it was established systematically as usual care to all or selected patient groups in 11 (26%) of the practices. All or selected patients’ medication lists were reconciled in 15 practices (35%). Nearly half of the practices (n = 19, 44%) lacked explicit methods for following up effects of medication changes. When reported, the effects were followed up as a routine control (n = 9, 21%) or in a follow-up appointment (n = 6, 14%).

Conclusions

Different MRs in varying settings were available and in routine use, the majority being comprehensive CMRs designed for primary outpatient care and for older adults. Even though practices might benefit from national standardization, flexibility in their customization according to context, medical and patient needs, and available resources is important.

The New Era of Pharmacists in Ambulatory Patient Care

Pharmacy is evolving from a product-oriented to a patient-oriented profession. This role modification is extremely healthy for the patient, the pharmacist, and other members of the health-care team. However, the evolution will present pharmacists with a number of new challenges. Now, more than in the past, pharmacists must make the acquisition of contemporary practice knowledge and skills a high priority, to render the level of service embodied in the concept of pharmaceutical care. Pharmacy educators' organizations and regulatory bodies must all work together to support pharmacists as they assume expanded health-care roles. Pharmacy and the healthcare industry must work to ensure that the pharmacist is compensated justly for all services. But before this can happen it will be necessary for pharmacy to demonstrate value-added to the cost of the prescription. Marketing of the purpose of pharmacy in the health-care morass and of the services provided by the pharmacist is needed to generate an appropriate perceived value among purchasers and users of health-care services. Pharmacists should view themselves as dispensers of therapy and drug effect interpretations as well as of drugs themselves. Service components of pharmacy should be identified clearly to third party payers and be visible to consumers, so that they know what is available at what cost and how it may be accessed. In the future, pharmacy services must be evaluated on patient outcome (i.e., pharmaceutical care) rather than the number of prescriptions dispensed, and pharmacy must evolve toward interpretation and patient consultation, related to the use of medication technologies.

Identification de facteurs de risque d’erreur de prescription médicamenteuse aux urgences : optimisation d’une activité de conciliation médicamenteuse à l’UHCD

Introduction : Les patients hospitalisés au décours d’un passage aux urgences sont à risque d’erreur médicamenteuse. Le déploiement de l’activité de conciliation médicamenteuse à l’admission en unité d’hospitalisation de courte durée (UHCD) permet d’identifier les divergences non intentionnelles (DNI) de prescription médicamenteuse hospitalière en comparaison avec le traitement pris à domicile, puis de les corriger. L’objectif de l’étude était d’identifier les facteurs prédictifs d’erreurs de prescription médicamenteuse aux urgences, afin de mieux prioriser la conciliation médicamenteuse pour les patients admis à l’UHCD.

Méthode : Nous avons mené une étude rétrospective, monocentrique et observationnelle incluant tous les patients ayant bénéficié d’une conciliation médicamenteuse à l’admission à l’UHCD pendant six mois. L’association entre les caractéristiques des patients et la survenue d’au moins une DNI a été étudiée à l’aide d’une régression logistique en ajustant sur les facteurs de confusion (analyse multivariée).

Résultats : Parmi 200 patients inclus, 111 étaient concernés par la survenue d’au moins une DNI (56 %) avec une médiane de deux par patient. Les erreurs étaient principalement des omissions, en majorité pour des traitements à visée cardiovasculaire et du système nerveux central. La majorité des patients étaient exposés à un potentiel événement indésirable lié aux soins (n = 70, 63 %), mais aucun à un événement indésirable de gravité potentielle catastrophique. Dans l’analyse multivariée, la présence d’au moins cinq lignes de traitement dans l’observation médicale de l’urgentiste était très prédictive de la survenue d’au moins une DNI (OR : 1,30 ; IC 95 % : [1,15–1,26] ; p < 0,01). Cette variable concernait principalement un groupe de patients distincts d’âge supérieur ou égal à 75 ans et connus pour au moins deux comorbidités dont la majorité a été concernée par au moins une DNI (69 %). Les facteurs organisationnels propres à l’hospitalisation en situation urgente n’étaient pas prédictifs de la survenue de DNI.

Conclusion : Pour le pharmacien de l’UHCD, la présence d’au moins cinq lignes de traitement dans l’observation médicale d’un patient doit être considérée comme une alerte et déclencher l’activité de conciliation médicamenteuse, en priorisant les patients âgés de plus de 75 ans et polypathologiques.