Unplanned Rehospitalisation due to Medication Harm following an Acute Myocardial Infarction.

INTRODUCTION: The contribution of medication harm to rehospitalisation and adverse patient outcomes after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) needs exploration. Rehospitalisation is costly to both patients and the healthcare facility. Following an AMI, patients are at risk of medication harm as they are often older and have multiple comorbidities and polypharmacy. This study aimed to quantify and evaluate medication harm causing unplanned rehospitalisation after an AMI. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients discharged from a quaternary hospital post-AMI. All rehospitalisations within 18 months were identified using medical record review and coding data. The primary outcome measure was medication harm rehospitalisation. Preventability, causality, and severity assessments of medication harm were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 1,564 patients experienced an AMI, and 415 (26.5%) were rehospitalised. Eighty-nine patients (5.7% of total population; 6.0% of those discharged) experienced a total of 101 medication harm events. Those with medication harm were older (p = 0.007) and had higher rates of heart failure (p = 0.005), chronic kidney disease (p = 0.046), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p = 0.037), and a prior history of ischaemic heart disease (p = 0.005). Gastrointestinal bleeding, acute kidney injury, and hypotension were the most common medication harm events. Forty percent of events were avoidable, and 84% were classed as "serious." Furosemide, antiplatelets, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were the most commonly implicated medications. The median time to medication harm rehospitalisation was 79 days (interquartile range: 16-200 days). CONCLUSION: Medication harm causes unplanned rehospitalisation in 5.7% of all AMI patients (1 in 17 patients; 6.0% of those discharged). The majority of harm was serious and occurred within the first 200 days of discharge. This study highlights that measures to attenuate the risk of medication harm rehospitalisation are essential, including post-discharge medication management.

Experiences and learnings of pharmacists, students, and clinical assistants working collaboratively in a COVID-19 vaccination clinic: a qualitative study.

Background: The involvement of pharmacists and pharmacy clinical assistants (CAs) in hospital clinics has demonstrated benefits for improving medication safety and care delivery. Internationally, pharmacy staff played a crucial role in the safe storage, provision and administration of vaccines, as well as reinforcement of pharmacovigilance efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Australia, healthcare providers collaborated to rapidly facilitate a phased COVID-19 vaccination program. The perspectives of the pharmacy team, including pharmacy students, involved in implementing novel health services are underexplored in the literature. Objective: To describe the key learnings in how a team of pharmacists, CAs and pharmacy students contributed to the COVID-19 vaccine service, and to explore their preparedness and experiences working at a vaccination clinic within a quaternary hospital. Method: This study involved semi-structured interviews with pharmacy students, CAs and pharmacists. All pharmacy staff who worked in the clinic were invited to participate in the study and a snowball strategy was used to maximise recruitment. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using inductive thematic techniques to identify major themes. Results: A total of 11 participants were interviewed including: four pharmacists, four CAs and three undergraduate students. Using thematic analysis, five main themes were identified: (1) Potential for student value and experiential learning; (2) Adaptive procedures and work practices in a rapidly changing environment; (3) Clear leadership, with role clarity, role expansion and interchangeability; (4) Supportive learning environment and (5) Stakeholder drivers for service delivery and to optimise societal benefit. These five themes often interacted with each other, highlighting the complexities of implementing and operating the service. Conclusions: The vaccine clinic service provided a novel and valuable opportunity for students, CAs, and pharmacists to work collaboratively, extending their scope of practice to contribute to better national health outcomes. Participants expressed their support for future initiatives involving pharmacy students and healthcare staff collaborating in hospital settings.

Patient harm from cardiovascular medications.

BACKGROUND: Medication harm can lead to hospital admission, prolonged hospital stay and poor patient outcomes. Reducing medication harm is a priority for healthcare organisations worldwide. Recent Australian studies demonstrate cardiovascular (CV) medications are a leading cause of harm. However, they appear to receive less recognition as 'high risk' medications compared with those classified by the medication safety acronym, 'APINCH' (antimicrobials, potassium, insulin, narcotics, chemotherapeutics, heparin). Our aim was to determine the scale and type of medication harm caused by CV medications in healthcare. METHODS: A narrative review of adult (>16 years) medication harm literature identified from PubMed and CINAHL databases was undertaken. Studies with the primary outcome of measuring the incidence of medication harm were included. Harm caused by CV medications was described and ranked against other medication classes at four key stages of a patient's healthcare journey. Where specified, the implicated medications and type of harm were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 75 studies were identified, including seven systematic reviews and three meta-analyses, with most focussing on harm causing hospital admission. CV medications were responsible for approximately 20% of medication harm; however, this proportion increased to 50% in older populations. CV medications were consistently ranked in the top five medication categories causing harm and were often listed as the leading cause. CONCLUSION: CV medications are a leading cause of medication harm, particularly in older adults, and should be the focus of harm mitigation strategies. A practical approach to generate awareness among health professionals is to incorporate 'C' (for CV medications) into the 'APINCH' acronym. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Patient harm from cardiovascular medications: Background: • Harm from medications can cause poor patient outcomes.• Certain medications have been identified as 'high risk' and are known to cause high rates of harm.• 'High risk' medications are included in medication guidelines used by health professionals.• Cardiovascular medications (e.g. blood pressure and cholesterol medications) are important and have many benefits.• Recent studies have found cardiovascular medications to cause high rates of harm.• Cardiovascular medication harm is often under-recognised in clinical practice.• Some guidelines do not consider cardiovascular medications to be 'high risk'.Method: • This review investigated the extent of harm caused by cardiovascular medications in adults across four healthcare settings:(1) at the time of hospital admission;(2) during hospital admission;(3) after hospital; and(4) readmission to hospital.• Harm caused by cardiovascular medications was ranked against other medication classes.• We investigated the type of cardiovascular medications to cause harm and the type of harm caused.Results: • Seventy-five studies were reviewed across 41 countries.• Cardiovascular medications were ranked within the top five medications to cause harm.• Cardiovascular medications were a leading cause of harm in each healthcare setting investigated.• Harm caused by cardiovascular medications was common in older adults (>65 years).• Cardiovascular medications often caused preventable harm.• Medications to treat high blood pressure and abnormal heart rhythms were the most common causes of harm.• We reported kidney injury, electrolyte changes and low blood pressure as common types of harm.Conclusion: • Increased focus on cardiovascular medications in clinical practice is needed.• Health professionals need to carefully prescribe and frequently review cardiovascular medications, especially in older adults.• Patient and health professional discussions should be based on both the benefits and harms of cardiovascular medications.• Cardiovascular medications should be included in all 'high risk' medication guidelines.