Clinically relevant potential drug-drug interactions in intensive care patients: A large retrospective observational multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) may harm patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Due to the patient's critical condition and continuous monitoring on the ICU, not all pDDIs are clinically relevant. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) warning for irrelevant pDDIs could result in alert fatigue and overlooking important signals. Therefore, our aim was to describe the frequency of clinically relevant pDDIs (crpDDIs) to enable tailoring of CDSSs to the ICU setting. MATERIALS & METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective observational study, we used medication administration data to identify pDDIs in ICU admissions from 13 ICUs. Clinical relevance was based on a Delphi study in which intensivists and hospital pharmacists assessed the clinical relevance of pDDIs for the ICU setting. RESULTS: The mean number of pDDIs per 1000 medication administrations was 70.1, dropping to 31.0 when considering only crpDDIs. Of 103,871 ICU patients, 38% was exposed to a crpDDI. The most frequently occurring crpDDIs involve QT-prolonging agents, digoxin, or NSAIDs. CONCLUSIONS: Considering clinical relevance of pDDIs in the ICU setting is important, as only half of the detected pDDIs were crpDDIs. Therefore, tailoring CDSSs to the ICU may reduce alert fatigue and improve medication safety in ICU patients.

Voluntarily reported prescribing, monitoring and medication transfer errors in intensive care units in The Netherlands.

Background Medication errors occur frequently in intensive care units (ICU). Voluntarily reported medication errors form an easily available source of information. Objective This study aimed to characterize prescribing, monitoring and medication transfer errors that were voluntarily reported in the ICU, in order to reveal medication safety issues. Setting This retrospective data analysis study included reports of medication errors from eleven Dutch ICU's from January 2016 to December 2017. Method We used data extractions from the incident reporting systems of the participating ICU's. The reports were transferred into one database and categorized into type of error, cause, medication (groups), and patient harm. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate the proportion of medication errors and the distribution of subcategories. Based on the analysis, ICU medication safety issues were revealed. Main outcome measure The main outcome measure was the proportion of prescribing, monitoring and medication transfer error reports. Results Prescribing errors were reported most frequently (n = 233, 33%), followed by medication transfer errors (n = 85, 12%) and monitoring errors (n = 27, 4%). Other findings were: medication transfer errors frequently caused serious harm, especially the omission of home medication involving the central nervous system and proton pump inhibitors; omissions and dosing errors occurred most frequently; protocol problems caused a quarter of the medication errors; and medications needing blood level monitoring (e.g. tacrolimus, vancomycin, heparin and insulin) were frequently involved. Conclusion This analysis of voluntarily reported prescribing, monitoring and medication transfer errors warrants several improvement measures in these processes, which may help to increase medication safety in the ICU.

Pharmacist interventions during patient rounds in two intensive care units: Clinical and financial impact.

INTRODUCTION: The risk of prescribing errors and related adverse drug events (ADE) on the intensive care unit (ICU) is high. Based on studies carried out in North America or the UK, a clinical pharmacy service can reduce ADEs and lower overall costs. This study looks into the clinical and financial impact of interventions made by pharmacists during patient rounds in two ICU settings in the Netherlands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A quality improvement study was performed in a general teaching hospital (GTH) and a university hospital (UH) in the Netherlands. The improvement consisted of a review of medication orders and participation in patient rounds by an ICU-trained pharmacist. The main outcome measure was the proportion of accepted pharmacist interventions. Secondary outcome measures were the clinical relevance of the accepted interventions, the proportion of prevented potential ADEs (pADE) and a cost-benefit ratio. RESULTS: In the GTH 160 patients and in the UH 174 patients were included. A total of 332 and 280 interventions were analysed. Acceptance of the interventions was 67.3% in the GTH and 61.8% in the UH. The accepted interventions were mostly scored as clinically relevant, resulting in 0.16 and 0.11 prevented pADEs per patient. The cost benefit was €119 (GTH) and €136 (UH) per accepted intervention. CONCLUSION: This clinical pharmacy service in two ICUs resulted in high numbers of accepted and clinically relevant interventions. Our model appeared to be cost-effective in both ICU settings.