RESUMO
Purpose: Medication history is the method many organizations use to adhere to The Joint Commission's (TJC) National Patient Safety Goal (NPSG) to communicate accurate patient medication information. Literature is sparse comparing the number of medication histories completed in-person versus virtually. Methods: This is a single system, multi-site, retrospective observational study. Patients included were admitted through the Emergency Department during October 2022. The primary aim of this study compared the percent capture rates of medication history between 2 hybrid sites to an in-person site within a health-system. Our secondary objective compared the differences in the 'medication history acuity score' (MHAS), defined as the total number of edits, additions, and deletions made during a medication history. Results: The medication history capture rate at the in-person site was 74% and at the hybrid sites were 91% and 80%. There were no differences in total medications on each medication history between in-person and hybrid (11 [5-16] vs 11 [6-16]; P = .252). There were no differences in changes made on medication histories between in-person and hybrid (4 [1-7] vs 3 [1-7]; P = .595). Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that medication history capture rates and MHAS are comparable in both in-person and hybrid environments. This similarity suggests the feasibility of implementing hybrid models for medication history services in diverse healthcare settings, potentially enhancing the capacity of health systems to meet TJC NPSG. These findings indicate that hybrid models could be an effective strategy for healthcare systems to optimize their medication history services, especially in settings with varied patient volumes and site specialties.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Dose-dependent QT prolongation with class III antiarrhythmics mandates close monitoring often in an inpatient setting. Outpatient sotalol loading monitor provides an alternative to patients that is cost effective and allows preservation of hospital resources. OBJECTIVES: The objectives for this study include assessing adverse events, assessing patient adherence to monitoring and follow-up, comparing hospital cost and resource utilization, and evaluating patient satisfaction with outpatient sotalol loading program. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: One pharmacist in the antiarrhythmic clinic at OhioHealth Riverside Methodist Hospital completed 3-day outpatient sotalol loads under a collaborative practice agreement. Clinic services included pharmacotherapy management, medication counseling, and device education. PRACTICE INNOVATION: This service allows pharmacists to provide direct patient monitoring to provide increased patient access. EVALUATION METHODS: All data were collected via the electronic medical record, patient journal documentation, and a patient satisfaction survey. RESULTS: A total of 12 patients completed outpatient sotalol loading; 10 patients started in normal sinus rhythm, and 1 patient was cardioverted during the load. No patients experienced any adverse events during the loading phase. One patient completed a successful dose increase during the loading phase. All 12 patients attended the first visit, completed baseline laboratory tests, and uploaded electrocardiograms for all 3 days. A total of 11 patients were evaluated as a cost comparison for inpatient sotalol loading. On average, outpatient loading cost was $886.30, in comparison with $7571.76 for inpatient loading (P < 0.001). A total of 10 patients completed the satisfaction survey, and all of the patients preferred to complete this in the outpatient setting. CONCLUSION: In this study, 12 patients safely completed outpatient sotalol loading, with an overall decrease in the cost of their care in comparison with inpatient loading. This study showed that pharmacists can serve as physician extenders to continue to provide high-quality and safe care to patients in the antiarrhythmic space.
