Medication discrepancies and associated risk factors identified among elderly patients discharged from a tertiary hospital in Singapore

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>Medication discrepancies and poor documentation of medication changes (e.g. lack of justification for medication change) in physician discharge summaries can lead to preventable medication errors and adverse outcomes. This study aimed to identify and characterise discrepancies between preadmission and discharge medication lists, to identify associated risk factors, and in cases of intentional medication discrepancies, to determine the adequacy of the physician discharge summaries in documenting reasons for the changes.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>A retrospective clinical record review of 150 consecutive elderly patients was done to estimate the number of medication discrepancies between preadmission and discharge medication lists. The two lists were compared for discrepancies (addition, omission or duplication of medications, and/or a change in dosage, frequency or formulation of medication). The patients' clinical records and physician discharge summaries were reviewed to determine whether the discrepancies found were intentional or unintentional. Physician discharge summaries were reviewed to determine if the physicians endorsed and documented reasons for all intentional medication changes.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>A total of 279 medication discrepancies were identified, of which 42 were unintentional medication discrepancies (35 were related to omission/addition of a medication and seven were related to a change in medication dosage/frequency) and 237 were documented intentional discrepancies. Omission of the baseline medication was the most common unintentional discrepancy. No reasons were provided in the physician discharge summaries for 54 (22.8%) of the intentional discrepancies.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Unintentional medication discrepancies are a common occurrence at hospital discharge. Physician discharge summaries often do not have adequate information on the reasons for medication changes.</p>

When traditional model meets competencies in Singapore: beyond conflict resolution

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>The implementation of competency-based internal medicine (IM) residency programme that focused on the assurance of a set of 6 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core competencies in Singapore marked a dramatic departure from the traditional process-based curriculum. The transition ignited debates within the local IM community about the relative merits of the traditional versus competency-based models of medical education, as well as the feasibility of locally implementing a training structure that originated from a very different healthcare landscape. At the same time, it provided a setting for a natural experiment on how a rapid integration of 2 different training models could be achieved.</p><p><b>MATERIALS AND METHODS</b>Our department reconciled the conflicts by systematically examining the existing training structure and critically evaluating the 2 educational models to develop a new training curriculum aligned with institutional mission values, national healthcare priorities and ACGME-International (ACGME-I) requirements.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Graduate outcomes were conceptualised as competencies that were grouped into 3 broad areas: personal attributes, interaction with practice environment, and integration. These became the blueprint to guide curricular design and achieve alignment between outcomes, learning activities and assessments. The result was a novel competency-based IM residency programme that retained the strengths of the traditional training model and integrated the competencies with institutional values and the unique local practice environment.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>We had learned from this unique experience that when 2 very different models of medical education clashed, the outcome may not be mere conflict resolution but also effective consolidation and transformation.</p>

Presentation and outcome amongst older Singaporeans living with human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS): does age alone drive excess mortality?

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>There is little detailed information on human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) amongst older adults in Singapore.</p><p><b>MATERIALS AND METHODS</b>A retrospective study of 121 consecutive referrals of patients presenting for HIV care was conducted. Demographic, clinical and laboratory variables were collected. A prognostic model derived from the North American Veterans' Affairs Cohort Study (VACS) was used to estimate prognosis.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The median age at presentation was 43 (range, 18 to 76). Thirty-eight patients (31%) were aged 50 or older and 106 patients (88%) were male. Older patients were more likely to be of Chinese ethnicity (P = 0.035), married (P = 0.0001), unemployed or retired (P = 0.0001), and to have acquired their infection heterosexually (P = 0.0002). The majority of patients in both groups were symptomatic at presentation. Eighty-one (67%) had CD4 counts less than 200 at baseline with no observable differences in HIV ribonucleic acid (RNA) or clinical stage based on age. Non-Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) morbidity was observed more frequently amongst older patients. The estimated prognosis of patients differed significantly based on age. Using the VACS Index and comparing younger patients with those aged 50 and above, mean 5 year mortality estimates were 25% and 50% respectively (P <0.001). A trend towards earlier antiretroviral therapy was noted amongst older patients (P = 0.067) driven mainly by fewer financial difficulties reported as barriers to treatment.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Older patients form a high proportion of newly diagnosed HIV/AIDS cases and present with more non-AIDS morbidity. This confers a poor prognosis despite comparable findings with younger patients in terms of clinical stage, AIDS-defining illness, CD4 count and HIV viral load.</p>