ABSTRACT
Objetivo Conocer el grado de implantación de las prácticas seguras con los medicamentos en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva e identificar oportunidades de mejora. Diseño Estudio descriptivo multicéntrico. Ámbito Servicios de Medicina Intensiva. Participantes/procedimiento Cuarenta Servicios de Medicina Intensiva que voluntariamente cumplimentaron el «Cuestionario de autoevaluación de la seguridad del uso de los medicamentos en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva» entre marzo y septiembre del 2020. El cuestionario contiene 147 ítems de evaluación agrupados en 10 elementos clave. Variables principales de interés Puntuación media y porcentaje medio sobre el valor máximo posible en el cuestionario completo, en los elementos clave y en los ítems de evaluación. Resultados La puntuación media del cuestionario completo en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva fue de 436,8 (49,2% del valor máximo posible). No se encontraron diferencias según dependencia funcional, tamaño del hospital y tipo de servicio. Los elementos clave referentes a la incorporación de farmacéuticos en estos servicios, así como a la competencia y la formación de los profesionales en prácticas de seguridad, mostraron los valores más bajos (31,2% y 33,2%, respectivamente). Otros tres elementos clave relativos a la accesibilidad a la información sobre los pacientes y los medicamentos; a la estandarización, el almacenamiento y la distribución de los medicamentos, y a los programas de calidad y gestión de riesgos mostraron porcentajes inferiores al 50%. Conclusiones Se han identificado numerosas prácticas seguras efectivas cuyo grado de implantación en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva es bajo y que es preciso abordar para reducir los errores de medicación en el paciente crítico (AU)
Objective To assess the level of implementation of medication safety practices in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) and to identify opportunities for improvement. Design A descriptive multicenter study was carried out. Setting Intensive Care Units. Participants/procedure A total of 40 ICUs voluntarily completed the Medication use-system safety self-assessment for Intensive Care Units between March and September 2020. The survey comprised 147 items for evaluation grouped into 10 key elements. Main variables Calculation was made of the mean scores and mean percentages based on the maximum possible values for the overall survey, for the key elements and for each individual item for evaluation. Results The mean score of the overall questionnaire among the participating ICUs was 436.8 (49.2% of the maximum possible score). No differences were found according to functional dependence, size of the hospital or type of ICU. The key elements referred to the incorporation of clinical pharmacists in these units, as well as the competence and training of the professionals in safety practices yielded the lowest values (31.2% and 33.2%, respectively). Three other key elements related to accessibility to information about patients and medicines; to the standardization, storage and distribution of medicines; and to the quality and risk management programs, yielded percentages below 50%. Conclusions Numerous effective safety medication practices have been identified with a low level of implementation in ICUs. This situation must be addressed in order to reduce medication errors in critically ill patients (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/standards , Intensive Care Units , Medication Errors/prevention & control , Patient Safety , Critical Care , Surveys and Questionnaires , Critical IllnessABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of implementation of medication safety practices in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) and to identify opportunities for improvement. DESIGN: A descriptive multicenter study was carried out. SETTING: Intensive Care Units. PARTICIPANTS/PROCEDURE: A total of 40 ICUs voluntarily completed the "Medication use-system safety self-assessment for Intensive Care Units" between March and September 2020. The survey comprised 147 items for evaluation grouped into 10 key elements. MAIN VARIABLES: Calculation was made of the mean scores and mean percentages based on the maximum possible values for the overall survey, referred to the key elements and to each individual item for evaluation. RESULTS: The mean score of the overall questionnaire among the participating ICUs was 436.8 (49.2% of the maximum possible score). No differences were found according to functional dependence, size of the hospital or type of ICU. The key elements referred to the incorporation of clinical pharmacists in these Units, as well as the competence and training of the professionals in safety practices yielded the lowest values (31.2% and 33.2%, respectively). Three other key elements related to accessibility to information about patients and medicines; to the standardization, storage and distribution of medicines; and to the quality and risk management programs, yielded percentages <50%. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous effective safety medication practices have been identified with a low level of implementation in ICUs. This situation must be addressed in order to reduce medication errors in critically ill patients.
Subject(s)
Intensive Care Units , Medication Errors , Humans , Medication Errors/prevention & control , Critical Illness , Pharmacists , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the level of implementation of medication safety practices in Intensive Care Units (ICUs) and to identify opportunities for improvement. DESIGN: A descriptive multicenter study was carried out. SETTING: Intensive Care Units. PARTICIPANTS/PROCEDURE: A total of 40 ICUs voluntarily completed the "Medication use-system safety self-assessment for Intensive Care Units" between March and September 2020. The survey comprised 147 items for evaluation grouped into 10 key elements. MAIN VARIABLES: Calculation was made of the mean scores and mean percentages based on the maximum possible values for the overall survey, for the key elements and for each individual item for evaluation. RESULTS: The mean score of the overall questionnaire among the participating ICUs was 436.8 (49.2% of the maximum possible score). No differences were found according to functional dependence, size of the hospital or type of ICU. The key elements referred to the incorporation of clinical pharmacists in these units, as well as the competence and training of the professionals in safety practices yielded the lowest values (31.2% and 33.2%, respectively). Three other key elements related to accessibility to information about patients and medicines; to the standardization, storage and distribution of medicines; and to the quality and risk management programs, yielded percentages below 50%. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous effective safety medication practices have been identified with a low level of implementation in ICUs. This situation must be addressed in order to reduce medication errors in critically ill patients.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of Pharmaceutical Interventions of starting a drug treatment based on the available scientific evidence, in an Emergency Department with a Clinical Pharmacist working full-time. To analyze the rate of Pharmaceutical Interventions over chronic or acute treatments and the ATC group of drugs involved. METHOD: The pharmacotherapy recommendations on Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) were classified and for every Pharmaceutical Intervention was assessed the quality of scientific evidence, strength of clinical recommendation, morbidity/mortality reduction, chronic or acute treatment and ATC group of drug involved. RESULTS: During the study period 2776 Pharmaceutical Interventions were performed of which 47% were starting-drug interventions, being 73% justified with scientific evidence. The 84% of starting-drug interventions were assessed with quality of evidence and strength of recommendation IA, 9% IC and 4% IB and 67% have been shown to reduce the morbidity/mortality according the CPG. 73% of interventions were related with patients' chronic treatment and ATC groups most frequently involved were N group (nervous system) and C group (cardiovascular system). In acute treatment the most frequent were B group and A group (Alimentary tract and metabolism). CONCLUSIONS: The starting-drug Pharmaceutical Interventions performed by an emergency department clinical pharmacist show a high adherence to CPG for most frequent pathologies, with good quality of evidence and good strength of recommendation as well as an associated morbidity/mortality reduction. Most starting-drug interventions were related to chronic treatment reconciliation, being drugs of N and C ATC group the most frequent involved.
Objetivo: Evaluar la calidad de las intervenciones farmacéuticas que motivaron un inicio de tratamiento en un Servicio de Urgencias. Analizar el porcentaje de intervenciones sobre tratamientos agudos o crónicos, y el grupo ATC de los fármacos implicados. Método: Se analizaron y clasificaron las intervenciones farmacéuticas realizadas durante un año, asignándoles el grado de recomendación, nivel de evidencia y reducción de la morbimortalidad teórica asociada según las guías de práctica clínica. También fueron clasificadas según el objetivo del tratamiento de la intervención (agudo o crónico), y por el grupo ATC. Resultado: Se realizaron 2.776 intervenciones farmacéuticas durante el período de estudio, siendo el 47% intervenciones de inicio de tratamiento. El 73% pudieron ser clasificadas según la evidencia científica disponible en las guías de práctica clínica. El 84% obtuvo un grado de recomendación y nivel de evidencia IA, el 9% IC y 4% IB. El 67% tenían asociada una disminución teórica de la morbimortalidad. El 73% de las intervenciones estuvieron relacionadas con el tratamiento crónico del paciente, siendo los grupos ATC más frecuentes el N y C. Mientras que en los tratamientos agudos los más frecuentes fueron el grupo B y A. Conclusiones: Las intervenciones de inicio de tratamiento realizadas por un farmacéutico clínico en el Servicio de Urgencias muestran una elevada adherencia a las guías de práctica clínica con un alto grado de recomendación y evidencia, y reducción teórica de la morbimortalidad asociada. La mayoría de las intervenciones estuvieron relacionadas con la conciliación de tratamientos crónicos, fundamentalmente fármacos del grupo N y C.
