Enhancing drug therapy in ostomy patients: Best practice recommendations for medication management.

BACKGROUND: Ostomy surgery is a common procedure that poses various challenges for patients and healthcare professionals. There are numerous guidelines addressing different ostomy-related problems (ORPs) and supporting an interdisciplinary approach for ostomy care, but evidence-based literature for optimizing drug therapy after ostomy surgery is lacking. AIM: To investigate and characterize typical ORPs in relation to drug therapy and provide best practice recommendations from a pharmaceutical point of view. METHODS: Patients with an ileo- or colostomy were consecutively enrolled in a prospective, interventional monocentric cohort study during hospitalization, with particular attention to medication. A clinical pharmacist assessed DRPs by performing level 3 medication reviews and patient interviews. Pharmacists' interventions (PIs) were evaluated by two senior clinical pharmacists and documented in DokuPIK (Documentation of Pharmacists' Interventions in the Hospital). Following interdisciplinary discussions, physicians either accepted or rejected the proposed changes in drug therapy. Comparisons were made between ileostomy and colostomy patients regarding type and extent of PIs. RESULTS: Out of the 80 patients included in the cohort, 54 (67.5%) had an ileostomy and 26 (32.5%) a colostomy. In this study, 288 PIs were documented (234 ileostomy vs. 54 colostomy), of wich 94.0% were accepted and implemented by the physicians. The most common reason for PIs in both subgroups (29.6% ileostomy vs. 26.1% colostomy) was a missing drug although indicated (e.g. no loperamide, but high stoma output). The proportion of PIs associated with the ostomy was higher in ileostomy patients (48.3% ileostomy vs. 31.5% colostomy; p = 0.025). Typical ORPs were extracted and analyzed as case studies including recommendations for their respective management and prevention. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of clinical pharmacists being a part of interdisciplinary teams to collaboratively improve ostomy care and patient safety. Especially ileostomy patients are more vulnerable for ORPs in the context of drug therapy and need to be monitored carefully.

The impact of pharmacists' interventions within the Closed Loop Medication Management process on medication safety: An analysis in a German university hospital.

Background: Single elements of the Closed Loop Medication Management process (CLMM), including electronic prescribing, involvement of clinical pharmacists (CPs), patient individual logistics and digital administration/documentation, have shown to improve medication safety and patient health outcomes. The impact of the complete CLMM on patient safety, as reflected in pharmacists' interventions (PIs), is largely unknown. Aim: To evaluate the extent and characterization of routine PIs performed by hospital-wide CPs at a university hospital with an implemented CLMM. Methods: This single-center study included all interventions documented by CPs on five self-chosen working days within 1 month using the validated online-database DokuPIK (Documentation of Pharmacists' Interventions in the Hospital). Based on different workflows, two groups of CPs were compared. One group operated as a part of the CLMM, the "Closed Loop Clinical Pharmacists" (CL-CPs), while the other group worked less dependent of the CLMM, the "Process Detached Clinical Pharmacists" (PD-CPs). The professional experience and the number of medication reviews were entered in an online survey. Combined pseudonymized datasets were analyzed descriptively after anonymization. Results: A total of 1,329 PIs were documented by nine CPs. Overall CPs intervened in every fifth medication review. The acceptance rate of PIs was 91.9%. The most common reasons were the categories "drugs" (e.g., indication, choice of formulation/drug and documentation/transcription) with 42.7%, followed by "dose" with 29.6%. One-quarter of PIs referred to the therapeutic subgroup "J01 antibacterials for systemic use." Of the 1,329 underlying PIs, 1,295 were classified as medication errors (MEs) and their vast majority (81.5%) was rated as "error, no harm" (NCC MERP categories B-D). Among PIs performed by CL-CPs (n = 1,125), the highest proportion of errors was categorized as B (56.5%), while in the group of PIs from PD-CPs (n = 170) errors categorized as C (68.2%) dominated (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Our study shows that a structured CLMM enables CPs to perform a high number of medication reviews while detecting and solving MEs at an early stage before they can cause harm to the patient. Based on key quality indicators for medication safety, the complete CLMM provides a suitable framework for the efficient medication management of inpatients.