Evaluating a medication history-taking entrustable professional activity and its assessment tool - Survey of a statewide public hospital pharmacy service.

INTRODUCTION: Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) are tasks that professionals within a field perform autonomously. EPAs are incorporated in workplace-based assessment tools to assist training and professional development. Few studies have evaluated medication history-taking EPAs use in pharmacy practice and none have sought stakeholder feedback on their use. This study evaluates the quality of the medication history-taking EPA utilized in South Australian public hospitals and the usability of its assessment tool. METHODS: A voluntary online questionnaire was conducted from July 15th to September 2nd 2021 to gather the opinions of stakeholders on the use of the medication history-taking EPA. The questionnaire was developed based on tools identified in the literature and utilized 14 open-text and five-point Likert scale questions. The questionnaire was distributed using Survey Monkey® to a purposive sample of staff and students. RESULTS: 82 responses were received from 218 surveys distributed, yielding a response rate of 38%. Respondents believed the EPA promotes learner development (90.6%) and the provision of useful feedback (83%). 94.3% considered the EPA to be easy to use but only 56.6% indicated that using it fits easily within their workday. Time constraints and the presence of context-specific descriptors were commonly perceived as limitations. Some stakeholders indicated a lack of understanding of entrustment decisions. CONCLUSION: The EPA and its assessment tool were perceived to have good quality and usability. Reducing the length of the tool, broadening its applicability across contexts, and improving user understanding of entrustment decision-making may support better use of the tool.

Use of a reference text by pharmacists, intern pharmacists and pharmacy students: a national cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Reference texts assist pharmacists by addressing knowledge gaps and enabling evidence-based decisions when providing patient care. It is unknown whether reference text utilisation patterns differ between pharmacists, intern pharmacists and pharmacy students. To describe and compare the self-reported use and perceptions of a reference text, namely the national formulary, by pharmacists, intern pharmacists and pharmacy students. METHODS: Registered pharmacists, intern pharmacists and pharmacy students living in Australia were surveyed in July 2020. The survey was electronic and self-administered. Questions considered self-reported use of a specific reference text in the preceding 12 months. KEY FINDINGS: There were 554 eligible responses out of 774 who commenced the survey: 430 (78%) pharmacists, 45 (8%) intern pharmacists and 79 (14%) pharmacy students. Most participants (529/554, 96%) reported historical use of the text, though pharmacists were significantly less likely than intern pharmacists and students to use it frequently (52/422, 12% versus 16/43, 37% versus 23/76, 30%, P < 0.001). Pharmacists (44%, 177/404) reported using the text as a tool to resolve a situation when providing a service or patient care (177/404, 44%) or as a teaching resource (150/404, 38%). In contrast, intern pharmacists and students most commonly use these to familiarise themselves with the contents (30/43, 70%; 46/76, 61%) or update their knowledge (34/43, 79%; 53/76, 70%). CONCLUSIONS: Access and use patterns varied significantly across career stages. A broader understanding of the use of reference texts may help develop interventions to optimise the content and usability. Varying usage patterns across the groups may inform the tailoring of texts for future use.

Identifying rates and risk factors for medication errors during hospitalization in the Australian Parkinson's disease population: A 3-year, multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: Admission to hospital introduces risks for people with Parkinson's disease in maintaining continuity of their highly individualized medication regimens, which increases their risk of medication errors. This is of particular concern as omitted medications and irregular dosing can cause an immediate increase in an individual's symptoms as well as other adverse outcomes such as swallowing difficulties, aspiration pneumonia, frozen gait and even potentially fatal neuroleptic malignant type syndrome. OBJECTIVE: To determine the occurrence and identify factors that contribute to Parkinson's medication errors in Australian hospitals. METHODS: A retrospective discharge diagnosis code search identified all admissions for people with Parkinson's disease to three tertiary metropolitan hospitals in South Australia, Australia over a 3-year period. Of the 405 case notes reviewed 351 admissions met our inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Medication prescribing (30.5%) and administration (85%) errors during admission were extremely common, with the most frequent errors related to administration of levodopa preparations (83%). A higher levodopa equivalent dosage, patients with a modified swallowing status or nil by mouth order during admission, and patients who did not have a pharmacist led medication history within 24 hours of admission had significantly higher rates of medication errors. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified 3 major independent factors that increased the risk of errors during medication management for people with Parkinson's disease during hospitalization. Thus, targeting these areas for preventative interventions have the greatest chance of producing a clinically meaningful impact on the number of hospital medication errors occurring in the Parkinson's population.

A comparison between Parkinson's medication errors identified through retrospective case note review versus via an incident reporting system during hospital admission.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the frequency and type of inpatient Parkinson's medication errors reported through an incident report system versus those identified through retrospective case note review in a tertiary teaching hospital. METHODS: A search of inpatient medication-related incident reports identified those pertaining to Parkinson's medication. A discharge diagnoses search identified admissions for patients with Parkinson's disease over the same time period. A retrospective case note and incident report review were performed to describe and quantify medication-related events. KEY FINDINGS: Substantially, more medication-related problems were identified via case note review (n = 805) versus incident reporting system (n = 19). A significantly different pattern of error types was identified utilising case note review versus incident reporting, with case note review more likely to identify delayed dosing, and incident reports more likely to identify wrong dose or formulation administered errors. CONCLUSIONS: Retrospective incident report and case note review can be used to characterise medication administration errors encountered in an inpatient setting. Incident report review alone is insufficient in estimating error rates, and dual data collection methods should be used.

Differences in the prescribing of potentially inappropriate medicines in older Australians: comparison of community dwelling and residential aged care residents.

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) can contribute to morbidity through exacerbations or progression of existing conditions among older people. In order to characterize the prevalence of PIMs according to the Beers Criteria in older Australians, three hundred and eleven participants were recruited from three residential aged care facilities (RACFs) and two hundred and twenty participants from three community pharmacies in South Australia for a retrospective audit of medication administration charts and community pharmacy dispensing histories. Although a similar number of participants were prescribed at least one PIM (P = 0.09), the average number of PIMs was significantly greater in the RACF cohort (1.96 vs 1.26, P < 0.05). Additionally, PIMs prescribed as pro re nata (PRN) in the RACF cohort had a significantly low administration rate compared to prescription rate (19.7% vs 40.7%). The mean number of PIMs within each cohort was statistically significant (RACF = 1.93 vs CDOA = 1.26, P < 0.05). RACF residents were at a slightly greater risk of being prescribed more than one PIM compared to those within the community. Routine medication reviews by pharmacists embedded in RACFs and within the community could be utilised to detect PIMs before such harm occurs.

Assessment of patient understanding of their medicines: interviews with community dwelling older Australians.

OBJECTIVE: To identify patterns of medication load, client's care team, coordination of healthcare and clients' understanding of their medications. METHODS: Face-to-face interviews were conducted with community-dwelling older Australians between June and August 2017 in three community pharmacies in Adelaide, South Australia. KEY FINDINGS: Forty interviews were conducted. On average, participants were taking 7.53 medicines with 77.5% using five or more regularly. Lack of collaboration between healthcare professionals, need for increased communication between prescribers and increased patient education on medicines, were highlighted. This study demonstrates that polypharmacy and inappropriate prescribing are occurring within the community pharmacy setting, but shows insight into how these concerns can be overcome, by implementing pharmacist-led services such as non-dispensing pharmacists in community pharmacies. CONCLUSION: Careful consideration when prescribing and effective communication are required to minimise risks associated with polypharmacy in this population.