Pharmacy student contribution to direct patient care during inpatient hospital experiential rotations: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this scoping review was to identify and characterise pharmacy students' contributions to extend pharmacist's direct patient care during inpatient hospital experiential rotations. METHODS: A search of PubMed, Embase and CINAHL databases from 2000 to July 2021 was conducted. Articles were included if they involved pharmacy students during experiential rotations, described student's contribution to direct patient care in the inpatient hospital setting, and reported outcomes. Included articles were categorised according to clinical pharmacy key performance indicators (cpKPIs) and non-cpKPI care activities. Students' contributions to reported outcomes were extracted and summarised. KEY FINDINGS: Thirty-six of 1182 identified articles were included which were either descriptive or quasi-experimental design. Studies reported student involvement in the delivery of single or multiple cpKPIs: medication reconciliation on admission (n = 13), pharmaceutical care (n = 13), interprofessional care rounds (n = 4), patient education during hospital stay (n = 6), medication reconciliation at discharge (n = 7) and patient education at discharge (n = 10). Eight studies reported student involvement in non-cpKPI activities, including clinical interventions (n = 5), clinical services (n = 2) and postdischarge follow-up (n = 1). Reported outcomes included service measure counts, process and clinical outcome measures. SUMMARY: This review identified the contributions of pharmacy students in the provision of a range of direct patient care services and associated outcomes during experiential rotations in the inpatient hospital setting. Students delivering care as part of the pharmacy team as 'care extenders' has the potential to expose more patients to key pharmacist activities that have been linked to demonstrated positive outcomes.

Medication clusters at hospital discharge and risk of adverse drug events at 30 days postdischarge: A population-based cohort study of older adults.

AIMS: Certain combinations of medications can be harmful and may lead to serious adverse drug events (ADEs). Identifying potentially problematic medication clusters could help guide prescribing and/or deprescribing decisions in hospital. The aim of this study is to characterize medication prescribing patterns at hospital discharge and determine which medication clusters were associated with an increased risk of ADEs in the 30-day posthospital discharge. METHODS: All residents of the province of Ontario in Canada aged 66 years or older admitted to hospital between March 2016 and February 2017 were included. Identification of medication clusters prescribed at hospital discharge was conducted using latent class analysis. Cluster identification and categorization were based on medications dispensed up to 30-day posthospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the potential association between membership to a particular medication cluster and ADEs postdischarge, while also evaluating other patient characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 188 354 patients were included in the study cohort. Median age (interquartile range) was 77 (71-84) years, and patients had a median (IQR) (interquartile range [IQR]) of 9 (6-13) medications dispensed prior to admission. Within the study population, 6 separate clusters of dispensing patterns were identified: cardiovascular (14%), respiratory (26%), complex care needs (12%), cardiovascular and metabolic (15%), infection (10%), and surgical (24%). Overall, 12 680 (7%) patients had an ADE in the 30 days following discharge. After considering other patient characteristics, those belonging to the respiratory cluster had the highest risk of ADEs (adjusted odds ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.17) compared with all the other clusters, while those in the complex care needs cluster had the lowest risk (adjusted odds ratio: 0.82, 95% confidence interval: 0.77-0.87). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that ADEs post hospital discharge can be linked with identifiable medication clusters. This information may help clinicians and researchers better understand patient populations that are more or less likely to benefit from peri-hospital discharge interventions aimed at reducing ADEs.

Assessment of Canadian Hospital Pharmacists' Job Satisfaction and Impact of Clinical Pharmacy Key Performance Indicators.

BACKGROUND: The clinical pharmacy key performance indicators (cpKPIs) are quantifiable measures of quality to advance clinical pharmacy practice and improve patient care. Although when delivered in combination they have been linked to important patient outcomes, no data are available relating to their impact on hospital pharmacists' job satisfaction. OBJECTIVES: To determine the level of job satisfaction among Canadian hospital pharmacists and whether participation in cpKPI activities contributes to hospital pharmacists' job satisfaction. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was conducted. An electronic survey, consisting of 36 questions, was developed using a validated pharmacist job satisfaction tool and was then distributed nationally to hospital pharmacists between January 30 and March 14, 2019. Focus groups were conducted with pharmacists at Horizon Health Network in New Brunswick to further explore activities that contribute to their job satisfaction. RESULTS: Overall, 284 pharmacists from 9 provinces completed the electronic survey. The mean job satisfaction score among hospital pharmacists was 3.93 (standard deviation 0.85) out of 5. Job satisfaction scores increased with increases in self-identified time spent performing cpKPI activities (r = 0.148, p = 0.014). Pharmacist satisfaction increased with time spent performing medication reconciliation on admission (ß = 0.140, p = 0.032) and decreased with time spent identifying and resolving drug therapy problems (ß = -0.153, p = 0.030). Three focus groups, comprising a total of 13 pharmacists, were conducted; during these sessions, some cpKPIs were highlighted favourably, although pharmacists described some ambivalence toward patient education. The importance of having an impact and receiving appreciation was highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian hospital pharmacists are generally satisfied with their jobs, and participation in cpKPI activities was found to be positively associated with hospital pharmacists' job satisfaction.

CONTEXTE: Les indicateurs clés de performance de la pharmacie clinique (ICPpc) sont des mesures quantifiables de la qualité qui permettent de faire avancer la pratique en pharmacie et d'améliorer les soins du patient. Bien qu'ils aient été associés à des résultats importants pour les patients lorsqu'ils sont utilisés conjointement, aucune donnée concernant leur impact sur la satisfaction professionnelle des pharmaciens d'hôpitaux n'est disponible. OBJECTIFS: Déterminer le degré de satisfaction professionnelle des pharmaciens d'hôpitaux canadiens et noter si la participation aux activités liées aux ICPpc y contribue. MÉTHODES: Une étude à méthodologie mixte a été menée. À l'aide d'un outil validé mesurant la satisfaction professionnelle du pharmacien, les investigateurs ont préparé une enquête électronique comprenant 36 questions, qui a été distribuée à l'échelle nationale aux pharmaciens d'hôpitaux entre le 30 janvier et le 14 mars 2019. Des groupes de travail comprenant des pharmaciens au Réseau de santé Horizon au Nouveau-Brunswick ont exploré plus en profondeur les activités qui contribuaient à leur satisfaction professionnelle. RÉSULTATS: Globalement, 284 pharmaciens de neuf provinces ont répondu à l'enquête électronique. Le score moyen de satisfaction des pharmaciens d'hôpitaux était de 3,93 (écart type 0,85) sur 5. Les scores relatifs à la satisfaction professionnelle augmentaient lorsque le temps passé à faire des activités liées aux ICPpc augmentait (r = 0,148, p = 0,014). La satisfaction du pharmacien augmentait quand il passait du temps à faire le bilan comparatif des médicaments au moment de l'admission (ß = 0,140, p = 0,032) et diminuait quand il devait déterminer et résoudre des problèmes de pharmacothérapie (ß = −0,153, p = 0,030). Trois groupes de discussion comprenant 13 pharmaciens au total se sont penchés sur la question. Pendant leurs séances, ils ont mis en valeur certains ICPpc, bien que les pharmaciens aient décrit des ambivalences concernant les instructions données au patient. Ils ont aussi souligné l'importance d'avoir un effet positif et d'être apprécié. CONCLUSIONS: Les pharmaciens d'hôpitaux canadiens sont généralement satisfaits de leur travail et la participation à des activités liées aux ICPpc est associée à leur satisfaction professionnelle.

An analysis of Canadian doctor of pharmacy hospital preceptor experiences in alternative preceptor models.

OBJECTIVE: To describe pharmacy preceptors' experiences in alternative preceptor models and their perceptions of these models' impact on the knowledge, skills, attitudes, behaviors, and professional practices of both themselves and their students. METHODS: Pharmacy preceptors with experience using alternative preceptor models participated in semi-structured interviews. Models included peer-assisted learning (PAL) (≥ two students of the same educational level), near-peer teaching (NPT) (≥ one junior student with ≥ one senior student), and co-preceptorship (CoP) (≥ two preceptors). Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed for themes using the Kirkpatrick framework for evaluating educational interventions. RESULTS: Twenty hospital pharmacy preceptors from 13 institutions were interviewed, and 13 themes were identified. Fourteen preceptors had experience with PAL, 9 with NPT, and 9 with CoP. Preceptors perceived that NPT and PAL fostered comfortable learning environments that supported student success; challenges included increased time teaching multiple students and completing evaluations. CoP allowed preceptors to balance teaching with clinical duties while broadening students' exposure to different practice settings. Preceptors improved skills in time management, communicating feedback, and adapting to individual students' learning needs and styles. Alternative models enabled preceptors to provide care to more patients and complete projects, thus extending their professional practice. They also described that students participating in these models developed a sense of responsibility for patient care and will be primed to work collaboratively with pharmacy colleagues in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Preceptors expressed satisfaction with alternative preceptor models. The models enhanced the learning, skill development, and professional practice of both preceptors and students.

A developmental evaluation of an intraprofessional Pharmacy Communication Partnership (PROMPT) to improve transitions in care from hospital to community: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: People transitioning from hospital- to community-based care are at increased risk of experiencing medication problems that can lead to adverse drug events and poor health outcomes. Community pharmacists provide medication expertise and support during care transitions yet are not routinely included in communications between hospitals and other primary health care providers. The PhaRmacy COMmunication ParTnership (PROMPT) intervention facilitates medication management by optimizing information sharing between pharmacists across care settings. This developmental evaluation sought to assess the feasibility and acceptability of implementing the PROMPT intervention, and to explore how contextual factors influenced its implementation. METHODS: PROMPT was implemented for 14 weeks (January-April, 2018) in the general internal medicine units at two teaching hospitals in Toronto, Canada. PROMPT featured two contact points between hospital and community pharmacists around patient discharge: (1) faxing an enhanced discharge prescription and discharge summary to a patient's community pharmacy and (2) a follow-up phone call from the hospital pharmacist to the community pharmacist. Our mixed-method evaluation involved electronic patient records, process measures using tracking forms, telephone surveys and semi-structured interviews with participating community and hospital pharmacists. RESULTS: The intervention involved 45 patients with communication between 12 hospital and 45 community pharmacists. Overall, the intervention had challenges with feasibility. Issues with fidelity included challenges with the medical discharge summary being available at the time of faxing and hospital pharmacists' difficulties with incorporating novel elements of the program into their existing practices. However, both community and hospital pharmacists recognized the potential benefits to patient care that PROMPT offered, and both groups proposed recommendations for further improvements. Suggestions included enhancing hospital staffing and resources. CONCLUSION: Improving intraprofessional collaboration, through interventions such as PROMPT, positions pharmacists as leaders of medication management services across care settings and has the potential to improve patient care; however, more co-design work is needed to enhance the intervention and its fidelity.

An Analysis of Canadian Doctor of Pharmacy Student Experiences in Non-Traditional Student-Preceptor Models.

Objective. To describe students' experiences and perceptions of non-traditional student-preceptor learning models and evaluate the effectiveness of these models on students' learning experience. Methods. Pharmacy students who had completed at least one experiential rotation with a non-traditional learning model participated in semi-structured interviews. Models included peer-assisted learning (PAL; two or more students of same educational level), near-peer teaching (NPT; one or more junior students with one or more senior students), and co-preceptorship (CoP; two or more preceptors). Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed for themes. Themes were mapped according to the Kirkpatrick model for evaluating educational training. Results. Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted. Forty-three experiences (19 CoP, 14 PAL, 10 NPT) from 14 institutions were described. Many themes overlapped between the three models. In CoP, learners described increased preceptor availability and exposure to different patient care approaches. Challenges arose when preceptors had different expectations. Students overwhelmingly endorsed a multi-learner environment. Both PAL and NPT learners felt supported as collaboration with other learners was readily fostered. Potential challenges in PAL and NPT were difficulties when personalities conflicted and when there was a significant knowledge gap between the learners. All three models allowed for the development of skills, including communication and collaboration. Learners reported an enhanced approach to patient care and professional practice, including approaches to teaching as new preceptors. Conclusion. Pharmacy students and graduates valued their experiences in non-traditional student-preceptor models. Institutions may find support for using these precepting models to increase placement capacity.

Enhanced communication between inpatient and community pharmacists to optimize medication management during transitions of care.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the Pharmacy Communication Partnership (PROMPT) program's approach to improving medication management for patients during transitions from hospital to the community. SETTING: Two general internal medicine units within a multisite academic hospital in Canada. PRACTICE INNOVATION: Designed by an interprofessional working group, PROMPT uses evidence-informed approaches to facilitate communication between pharmacists in different settings: faxing of the discharge prescription and medical discharge summary to a patient's community pharmacy, followed by a telephone call to the community pharmacist. EVALUATION: A multimethod cross-sectional study used telephone surveys and retrospective chart reviews to describe: 1) the characteristics of patients that hospital pharmacists thought would benefit from PROMPT and the community pharmacies that served them; 2) the number and nature of communication attempts made by community and hospital pharmacists; and 3) community pharmacists' views about PROMPT's potential impact on continuity of care and potential program enhancements. RESULTS: A convenience sample of 100 patients (median age 77 years, interquartile range 66 to 83) who received care from 86 pharmacies were used to evaluate the program. The majority of community pharmacists participating in the surveys considered the intervention to be helpful. Of the 53.7% (n = 44/82) community pharmacists who received discharge summaries, 93.2% (n = 41/44) found the summaries to be useful. Themes arising from community pharmacists' comments were categorized into 3 topics: 1) the benefits of PROMPT; 2) topics of discussion and clarification during telephone calls with hospital pharmacists; and 3) future program improvements. CONCLUSION: Community pharmacists described PROMPT as a time-efficient and helpful bridge linking community pharmacy to hospital inpatient care. Opportunities for future research include determining the characteristics of patients who may benefit most from PROMPT, determining the optimal components of discharge information needed by community pharmacists to enhance medication management, and evaluating whether follow-up telephone calls from the hospital to community pharmacists are necessary for all patients.

Do Combined Pharmacist and Prescriber Efforts on Medication Reconciliation Reduce Postdischarge Patient Emergency Department Visits and Hospital Readmissions?

BACKGROUND: Although medication reconciliation (Med Rec) has demonstrated a reduction in potential adverse drug events, its effect on hospital readmissions remains inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of an interprofessional Med Rec bundle from admission to discharge on patient emergency department visits and hospital readmissions (hospital visits). METHODS: The design was a retrospective, cohort study. Patients discharged from general internal medicine over a 57-month interval were identified through administrative databases. Patients who received an enhanced, Gold level, Med Rec bundle (including both admission Med Rec and interprofessional pharmacist-prescriber collaboration on discharge Med Rec) were assigned to the intervention group. Patients who received partial Med Rec services, Silver and Bronze level, comprised the control group. The primary outcome was hospital visits within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: Over a 57-month period, 9931 unique patient visits (n = 8678 patients) met the study criteria. The main analysis did not detect a difference in 30-day hospital visits between the intervention (Gold level bundle) and control (21.25% vs 19.26%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.19). Propensity score adjustment also did not detect an effect (16.7% vs18.9%; relative risk of readmission, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.59-1.32). CONCLUSION: A long-term, observational evaluation of interprofessional Med Rec did not detect a difference in 30- day postdischarge patient hospital visits between patients who received enhanced versus partial Med Rec patient care bundles. In future prospective studies, researchers could focus on evaluating high-risk populations and specific elements of Med Rec services on avoidable, medication-related hospital admissions and postdischarge adverse drug events.

Audit on the Use of Dangerous Abbreviations, Symbols, and Dose Designations in Paper Compared to Electronic Medication Orders: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Dangerous abbreviations on the Institute for Safe Medication Practices Canada's "Do Not Use" list have resulted in medication errors leading to harm. Data comparing rates of use of dangerous abbreviations in paper and electronic medication orders are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of use of dangerous abbreviations from the "Do Not Use" list, in paper and electronic medication orders. Secondary objectives include determining the proportion of patients at risk for medication errors due to dangerous abbreviations and the most commonly used dangerous abbreviations. METHODS: One-day cross-sectional audits of medication orders were conducted at a 6-site hospital network in Toronto, Canada, between December 2013 and January 2014. Proportions of paper and electronic medication orders containing dangerous abbreviation(s) were compared using a χ2 test. The proportion of patients with at least 1 medication order containing dangerous abbreviation(s) and the top 5 dangerous abbreviations used were described. RESULTS: Overall, 255 patient charts were reviewed. The proportions of paper and electronic medication orders containing dangerous abbreviation(s) were 172/714 (24.1%) and 9/2207 (0.4%), respectively ( P < 0.001). Almost one-third of patients had medication order(s) containing dangerous abbreviation(s). The proportions of patients with at least 1 medication order during the audit period containing dangerous abbreviation(s) for patients with paper only, electronic only, or a hybrid of paper and electronic medication orders were 50.5%, 5%, and 47.2%, respectively. Those most commonly used were "D/C", drug name abbreviations, "OD," "cc," and "U." CONCLUSIONS: Electronic medication orders have significantly lower rates of dangerous abbreviation use compared to paper medication orders.

Unintentional Continuation of Medications Intended for Acute Illness After Hospital Discharge: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients are vulnerable to medication-related errors during transitions in care. Patients discharged from acute care hospitals may be at an elevated risk for the unintentional continuation of medications prescribed to prevent or treat complications that are associated with acute illness but are no longer indicated. We sought to evaluate rates of (primary objective) and risk factors for (secondary objective) potentially unintentional medication continuation following hospitalization. METHODS: A population-based cohort study of more than one million patients 66 years of age or older who were hospitalized in Ontario, Canada, between 2003 and 2011 and followed for 1 year (2004 to 2012). We created distinct cohorts by identifying seniors not previously receiving four classes of medications typically used to treat or prevent complications of acute illness: (1) antipsychotic medications, (2) gastric acid suppressants (histamine-2 blockers and proton pump inhibitors), (3) benzodiazepines, and (4) inhaled bronchodilators and steroids. After excluding documented indications, we followed patients to ascertain whether these medications were continued after hospital discharge, and assessed risk factors for their continuation using generalized estimating equations. The primary outcome was the new dispensation of any of the selected medications within 7 days of hospital discharge. RESULTS: Prescription without documented indication occurred across all medication classes, from 12,209 patients (1.4 %) for antipsychotic medications to 34,140 patients (6.1 %) for gastric acid suppressants. Risk factors for unintentional continuation varied across medication groups, but rates were consistently higher for older patients, those with multiple comorbidities, and emergency hospitalizations. The largest absolute risk factor across all medications was a hospitalization > 7 days [OR 2.03 (95 % CI 1.94-2.11) for respiratory inhalers, 6.35 (95 % CI 5.91-6.82) for antipsychotic medications]. These medications were often continued at 1 year of follow-up, and accounted for a total additional medication cost of over CAD$18 million for the study population. CONCLUSION: Discharged patients are at risk of being prescribed and dispensed medications that are typically intended to prevent or treat complications of acute illness, despite having no documented indication for chronic use.

Unintentional Discontinuation of Chronic Medications for Seniors in Nursing Homes: Evaluation of a National Medication Reconciliation Accreditation Requirement Using a Population-Based Cohort Study.

Transitions of care leave patients vulnerable to the unintentional discontinuation of medications with proven efficacy for treating chronic diseases. Older adults residing in nursing homes may be especially susceptible to this preventable adverse event. The effect of large-scale policy changes on improving this practice is unknown.The objective of this study was to analyze the effect of a national medication reconciliation accreditation requirement for nursing homes on rates of unintentional medication discontinuation after hospital discharge.It was a population-based retrospective cohort study that used linked administrative records between 2003 and 2012 of all hospitalizations in Ontario, Canada. We identified nursing home residents aged ≥66 years who had continuous use of ≥1 of the 3 selected medications for chronic disease: levothyroxine, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs).In 2008 medication reconciliation became a required practice for accreditation of Canadian nursing homes.The main outcome measures included the proportion of patients who restarted the medication of interest after hospital discharge at 7 days. We also performed a time series analysis to examine the impact of the accreditation requirement on rates of unintentional medication discontinuation.The study included 113,088 adults aged ≥66 years who were nursing home residents, had an acute hospitalization, and were discharged alive to the same nursing home. Overall rates of discontinuation at 7-days after hospital discharge were highest in 2003-2004 for all nursing homes: 23.9% for thyroxine, 26.4% for statins, and 23.9% for PPIs. In most of the cases, these overall rates decreased annually and were lowest in 2011-2012: 4.0% for thyroxine, 10.6% for statins, and 8.3% for PPIs. The time series analysis found that nursing home accreditation did not significantly lower medication discontinuation rates for any of the 3 drug groups.From 2003 to 2012, there were marked improvements in rates of unintentional medication discontinuation among hospitalized older adults who were admitted from and discharged to nursing homes. This change was not directly associated with the new medication reconciliation accreditation requirement, but the overall improvements observed may have been reflective of multiple processes and not 1 individual intervention.

Development of clinical pharmacy key performance indicators for hospital pharmacists using a modified Delphi approach.

BACKGROUND: Key performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures of quality. There are no published, systematically derived clinical pharmacy KPIs (cpKPIs). OBJECTIVE: A group of hospital pharmacists aimed to develop national cpKPIs to advance clinical pharmacy practice and improve patient care. METHODS: A cpKPI working group established a cpKPI definition, 8 evidence-derived cpKPI critical activity areas, 26 candidate cpKPIs, and 11 cpKPI ideal attributes in addition to 1 overall consensus criterion. Twenty-six clinical pharmacists and hospital pharmacy leaders participated in an internet-based 3-round modified Delphi survey. Panelists rated 26 candidate cpKPIs using 11 cpKPI ideal attributes and 1 overall consensus criterion on a 9-point Likert scale. A meeting was facilitated between rounds 2 and 3 to debate the merits and wording of candidate cpKPIs. Consensus was reached if 75% or more of panelists assigned a score of 7 to 9 on the consensus criterion during the third Delphi round. RESULTS: All panelists completed the 3 Delphi rounds, and 25/26 (96%) attended the meeting. Eight candidate cpKPIs met the consensus definition: (1) performing admission medication reconciliation (including best-possible medication history), (2) participating in interprofessional patient care rounds, (3) completing pharmaceutical care plans, (4) resolving drug therapy problems, (5) providing in-person disease and medication education to patients, (6) providing discharge patient medication education, (7) performing discharge medication reconciliation, and (8) providing bundled, proactive direct patient care activities. CONCLUSIONS: A Delphi panel of hospital pharmacists was successful in determining 8 consensus cpKPIs. Measurement and assessment of these cpKPIs will serve to advance clinical pharmacy practice and improve patient care.

A formal medication reconciliation programme in a haemodialysis unit can identify medication discrepancies and potentially prevent adverse drug events.

BACKGROUND: Patients on haemodialysis have been identified as high-risk for medication discrepancies and adverse drug events. Medication reconciliation is an important patient safety initiative to prevent adverse drug events. The primary objective of our study was to determine the number and types of medication discrepancies and drug therapy problems (DTPs) identified in patients on haemodialysis. Our second objective was to assess the potential clinical impact and severity of all unintentional medication discrepancies identified. METHODS: Patients in an academic haemodialysis unit were interviewed to obtain a best possible medication history (BPMH) between May and August 2010. The BPMH was documented and discrepancies were identified, classified and resolved with the interprofessional team. An interprofessional panel conducted a discrepancy clinical impact assessment for potential adverse drug events. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-eight patients on haemodialysis were interviewed and 512 discrepancies were identified for 151 patients (3.4 discrepancies per patient). Of these, 174 (34%) were undocumented intentional discrepancies and 338 (66%) were unintentional discrepancies. The unintentional discrepancies were classified as 21% omissions, 36% commissions and 43% incorrect dose/frequency. Most drug therapy problems were related to patient taking a medication that was not indicated (25%), medication required but patient not taking (25%), patient not willing to take the medication as prescribed (28%) or incorrect dosing of a drug (20%). Overall, 6% of discrepancies were classified as clinically significant potential adverse drug events. CONCLUSION: Medication discrepancies appear to be common in patients on haemodialysis. Formal interprofessional medication reconciliation practice models are essential to identify discrepancies and prevent patients from experiencing adverse drug events.

Medication reconciliation in the hospital: what, why, where, when, who and how?

Medication reconciliation arose as the solution to the well-documented patient safety problem of unintentionally introducing changes in patients' medication regimens due to incomplete or inaccurate medication information at transitions in care. Unfortunately, medication reconciliation has often been misperceived as a superficial administrative accounting task with a "pre-occupation with completing forms," resulting in the implementation of ineffective processes. In this article, the authors briefly review the evidence supporting medication reconciliation but focus more on key practical questions regarding the elements of an effective medication reconciliation process: what it should consist of, where and when it should occur, who should carry it out and how hospitals should implement it. The authors take the why of medication reconciliation to consist not just of the professional obligation to avoid causing harm, but also of a rational self-interest on the part of healthcare leaders. The authors argue that, rather than wasting time implementing a nominal reconciliation process, we should invest time and energy in a more robust and effective strategy, and they address specific practical questions that arise in such an effort.

Medication reconciliation during internal hospital transfer and impact of computerized prescriber order entry.

BACKGROUND: Internal hospital transfer is a vulnerable time during which patients are at high risk of medication discrepancies that can result in clinically significant harm, medication errors, and adverse drug events. OBJECTIVE: To identify, characterize, and assess the clinical impact of unintentional medication discrepancies during internal hospital transfer and to investigate the influence of computerized prescriber order entry (CPOE) on medication discrepancies. METHODS: All patients transferred between 10 inpatient units at 2 tertiary care hospitals were prospectively assessed to identify discrepancies. Interfaces included transfers between (1) units that both used paper-based medication ordering systems; (2) units that both used CPOE-based systems; and (3) units that used both paper-based and CPOE-based systems (hybrid transfer). The primary endpoint was the number of patients with at least 1 unintentional medication discrepancy during internal hospital transfer. Discrepancies were identified through assessment and comparison of a best possible medication transfer list with the actual transfer orders. A multidisciplinary team of clinicians assessed the potential clinical impact and severity of unintentional discrepancies. RESULTS: Overall, 190 patients were screened and 129 patients were included. Eighty patients (62.0%) had at least 1 unintentional medication discrepancy at the time of transfer, and the most common discrepancy was medication omission (55.6%). Factors that independently increased the risk of a patient experiencing at least 1 unintentional discrepancy included lack of best possible medication history, increasing number of home medications, and increasing number of transfer medications. Forty-seven patients (36.4%) had at least 1 unintentional discrepancy with the potential to cause discomfort and/or clinical deterioration. The risk of discrepancies was present regardless of the medication-ordering system (paper, CPOE, or hybrid). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically significant medication discrepancies occur commonly during internal hospital transfer. A structured, collaborative, and clearly defined medication reconciliation process is needed to prevent internal transfer discrepancies and patient harm.

Medication reconciliation at hospital discharge: evaluating discrepancies.

BACKGROUND: Hospital discharge is an interface of care when patients are at a high risk of medication discrepancies as they transition from hospital to home. These discrepancies are important, as they may contribute to drug-related problems, medication errors, and adverse drug events. OBJECTIVE: To identify, characterize, and assess the clinical impact of unintentional medication discrepancies at hospital discharge. METHODS: All consecutive general internal medicine patients admitted for at least 72 hours to a tertiary care teaching hospital were prospectively assessed. Patients were excluded if they were discharged with verbal prescriptions; died during hospitalization; or transferred from or to a nursing home, another institution, or another unit within the same hospital. The primary endpoint was to determine the number of patients with at least one unintended medication discrepancy on hospital discharge. Medication discrepancies were assessed through comparison of a best possible medication discharge list with the actual discharge prescriptions. Secondary objectives were to characterize and assess the potential clinical impact of the unintentional discrepancies. RESULTS: From March 14, 2006, to June 2, 2006, 430 patients were screened for eligibility; 150 patients were included in the study. Overall, 106 (70.7%) patients had at least one actual or potential unintentional discrepancy. Sixty-two patients (41.3%) had at least one actual unintentional medication discrepancy at hospital discharge and 83 patients (55.3%) had at least one potential unintentional discrepancy. The most common unintentional discrepancies were an incomplete prescription requiring clarification, which could result in a patient delay in obtaining medications (49.5%), and the omission of medications (22.9%). Of the 105 unintentional discrepancies, 31(29.5%) had the potential to cause possible or probable patient discomfort and/or clinical deterioration. CONCLUSIONS: Medication discrepancies occur commonly on hospital discharge. Understanding the type and frequency of discrepancies can help clinicians better understand ways to prevent them. Structured medication reconciliation may help to prevent discharge medication discrepancies.