Evaluation of a Novel Audit Tool for Medication Reconciliation at Hospital Discharge.

BACKGROUND: Discharge medication reconciliation (MedRec) is designed to reduce medication errors and inform patients and key postdischarge providers, but it has been difficult to implement routinely in Canadian hospitals. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and optimize a new discharge MedRec quality audit tool and to use it at 3 urban teaching hospitals. METHODS: The discharge MedRec quality audit tool, developed by the Canadian Patient Safety Institute and the Institute for Safe Medication Practices Canada, was assessed and modified to improve comprehensiveness, clarity, and quality. The modified tool was then used to evaluate the quality of the discharge MedRec process for adult patients discharged to home from the general internal medicine service at 3 academic hospitals. Postdischarge telephone interviews were conducted with consenting patients, their community pharmacists, and their family doctors. RESULTS: The audit tool required modification to include aspects of admission MedRec, high-risk medication discrepancies, and direct communication of discharge MedRec to key follow-up providers. Thirty-five patients (mean age 67.7 years, standard deviation [SD] 18.0 years; 17 [49%] women), with a mean of 8.8 (SD 4.5) prescribed medications at discharge, participated in the discharge MedRec evaluation. Documentation of any discharge MedRec was found for only 1 patient (3%), and no discharge MedRec was carried out by pharmacists. Postdischarge follow-up interviews elicited major gaps in communication with community pharmacists and with family physicians, which could lead to serious medication errors. CONCLUSIONS: The modified audit tool was useful for identifying gaps in the quality of discharge MedRec.

CONTEXTE: Le bilan comparatif des médicaments (BCM) au moment du congé est conçu pour réduire les erreurs médicamenteuses et informer les patients ainsi que les principaux prestataires de soins de santé après le congé, mais sa mise en oeuvre systématique dans les hôpitaux canadiens s'est heurtée à de grandes difficultés. OBJECTIFS: Évaluer et optimiser un nouvel outil d'évaluation de la qualité du BCM au moment du congé et l'utiliser dans trois hôpitaux universitaires urbains. MÉTHODES: Cet outil développé par l'Institut canadien pour la sécurité des patients (ICSP) et l'Institut pour la sécurité des médicaments aux patients du Canada (ISMP) a fait l'objet d'une évaluation et d'une modification visant à améliorer son exhaustivité, sa clarté et sa qualité. L'outil modifié a ensuite servi à évaluer la qualité du processus du BCM pour des patients adultes ayant obtenu leur congé après un séjour dans un service général de médecine interne dans trois hôpitaux universitaires. Des entretiens téléphoniques après le congé ont été menés avec les patients consentants, leur pharmacien communautaire et leur médecin de famille. RÉSULTATS: L'outil d'évaluation a dû être modifié pour inclure le BCM au moment de l'admission, des écarts de médication à haut risque et une communication directe du BCM aux prestataires de soins de santé principaux chargés du suivi après le congé. Trente-cinq patients (âge moyen: 67,7 ans; écart type [ET] 18 ans; 17 [49 %] femmes), chacun ayant reçu en moyenne 8,8 (ET 4,5) médicaments prescrits, ont participé à l'évaluation du BCM au congé de l'hôpital. Au moment du congé, on n'a trouvé de renseignements relatifs au BCM que pour un seul patient (3 %) et aucun BCM n'avait été préparé par les pharmaciens. Le suivi après le congé a généré des écarts de communication importants entre les pharmaciens communautaires et les médecins de famille, ce qui pourrait entraîner des erreurs médicamenteuses importantes. CONCLUSIONS: L'outil d'évaluation modifié a été utile pour déterminer les écarts relatifs à la qualité du BCM au moment du congé.

Prescribing competency assessment for Canadian medical students: a pilot evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The knowledge and ability to prescribe safely and effectively is a core competency for every graduating medical student. Our previous research suggested concerns about medical student prescribing abilities, and interest in a standardized assessment process. METHODS: A multi-year cross-sectional study evaluating the feasibility, acceptability, and discriminative ability of an online prescribing competency assessment for final year Canadian medical students was conducted. Students at nine sites of four Ontario medical schools were invited to participate in an online one-hour exam of eight domains related to prescribing safely. Student feedback on perceived fairness, clarity, and ease of use formed the primary outcome. Exam performance and parity between schools were the secondary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 714 students completed the assessment during spring final review courses between 2016 and 2018. Student feedback was more favourable than not for appropriateness of content (53.5% agreement vs 18.3% disagreement), clarity of questions (65.5% agreement vs 11.6% disagreement), question layout and presentation (70.8% agreement vs 12.2% disagreement), and ease of use of online interface (67.1% agreement vs 13.6% disagreement). Few (23.6% believed their course work had prepared them for the assessment. Mean total exam score was 70.0% overall (SD 10.4%), with 47.6% scoring at or above the pass threshold of 70%.Conclusion: Our prescribing competency assessment proved feasible, acceptable, and discriminative, and indicated a need for better medical school training to improve prescribing competency. Further evaluation in a larger sample of medical schools is warranted.