Inter-rater reliability of the assessment of adverse drug reactions in the hospitalised elderly.

BACKGROUND: The identification and assessment of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is very challenging especially among the older person. Inter observer reliability of an ADR classification system by different healthcare providers is vital to establish the validity of the reaction. OBJECTIVE: To assess the inter-rater reliability of an ADR classification system in hospitalised elderly patients and to investigate the differences in reliability by different professions. METHODS: From a cohort of 330 elderly patients, patients who experienced a suspected medication related incident (n=87) were selected. The data were analysed by four healthcare professionals (2 pharmacists and 2 physicians) who independently classified the events into event type, types of adverse drug reactions, severity and preventability after a standardised induction based on previously published criteria. Fleiss' kappa was used to assess the level of agreement between the four raters. The difference in level of agreement between the professions was assessed using the weighted least-squares approach for comparing correlated kappa of Barnhart et al. RESULTS: Pharmacists and physicians showed high agreement in the identification and on the type and causality of ADRs. However there was lower (moderate) agreement for the severity (kappa = 0.61) and preventability of ADR (kappa = 0.48). Statistically significant differences were also noted between the professions; pharmacists have higher agreement in the classification of preventability (p=0.03) whereas the physicians pairs showed stronger agreement for classifying severity (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite the high agreement in the identification, type and causality of ADRs, physicians and pharmacists have difficulties in classifying preventability and severity in a reliable way. A multi-disciplinary approach would enable each profession to share their expert knowledge in order to facilitate better or safer patient care.

Women's views on and adherence to low-molecular-weight heparin therapy during pregnancy and the puerperium.

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to prescribed medication represents a significant factor associated with treatment failure. Pregnant women identified at risk of venous thromboembolism are increasingly being prescribed low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) during pregnancy and the puerperium. It is important to understand women's views on and adherence to LMWH during pregnancy and the puerperium, so that women gain maximum benefit from the treatment. OBJECTIVES: To monitor women's adherence to enoxaparin, when prescribed during pregnancy and the puerperium, and explore their beliefs about the enoxaparin therapy prescribed. PATIENTS/METHODS: A prospective cohort study involving 95 nullparous and multiparous women prescribed enoxaparin for recognized antenatal indications. Adherence to enoxaparin was assessed through self-completion of a diary, additionally verified through laboratory tests. An adapted beliefs about medication questionnaire was administered to women during their pregnancy. RESULTS: Women were highly adherent to enoxaparin: antenatally, mean percentage adherence 97.92%; postnatally, mean percentage adherence 93.37% (paired t-test, P = 0.000). In the cohort of women we followed, their perceived necessity for enoxaparin therapy outweighed any concerns they had regarding enoxaparin antenatally, necessity-concerns differential 2.20. In some women, however, this perceived necessity does decrease postnatally. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that most women prescribed enoxaparin are highly adherent to their therapy during the antenatal period and that women's antenatal beliefs about enoxaparin are able to predict a decrease in postnatal adherence. Our results have important clinical implications, particularly when women are initiated on LMWH just during the postnatal period.