Approaches to Optimize Medication Data Analysis in Clinical Cohort Studies.

OBJECTIVES: Methods for pharmacoepidemiologic studies of large-scale data repositories are established. Although clinical cohorts of older adults often contain critical information to advance our understanding of medication risk and benefit, the methods best suited to manage medication data in these samples are sometimes unclear and their degree of validation unknown. We sought to provide researchers, in the context of a clinical cohort study of delirium in older adults, with guidance on the methodological tools to use data from clinical cohorts to better understand medication risk factors and outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: The Successful Aging After Elective Surgery (SAGES) prospective cohort. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 560 older adults (aged ≥70 years) without dementia undergoing elective major surgery. MEASUREMENTS: Using the SAGES clinical cohort, methods used to characterize medications were identified, reviewed, analyzed, and distinguished by appropriateness and degree of validation for characterizing pharmacoepidemiologic data in smaller clinical data sets. RESULTS: Medication coding is essential; the American Hospital Formulary System, most often used in the United States, is not preferred over others. Use of equivalent dosing scales (e.g., morphine equivalents) for a single medication class (e.g., opioids) is preferred over multiclass analgesic equivalency scales. Medication aggregation from the same class (e.g., benzodiazepines) is well established; the optimal prevalence breakout for aggregation remains unclear. Validated scale(s) to combine structurally dissimilar medications (e.g., anticholinergics) should be used with caution; a lack of consensus exists regarding the optimal scale. Directed acyclic graph(s) are an accepted method to conceptualize causative frameworks when identifying potential confounders. Modeling-based strategies should be used with evidence-based, a priori variable-selection strategies. CONCLUSION: As highlighted in the SAGES cohort, the methods used to classify and analyze medication data in clinically rich cohort studies vary in the rigor by which they have been developed and validated.

The medication discrepancy taxonomy (MedTax): The development and validation of a classification system for medication discrepancies identified through medication reconciliation.

BACKGROUND: Medication discrepancies directly impact patient safety and can adversely impact quality of care and resource utilization at transitions of care. OBJECTIVES: To develop a common nomenclature and taxonomy for classifying and reporting medication discrepancies and to assess the content validity and reliability of the taxonomy. METHODS: The taxonomy was developed following a multi-stage process. The content of the taxonomy was then assessed using expert opinion through a two-round modified Delphi process. The expert panel comprised 10 experts who were selected based on pre-defined selection criteria. Six experienced pharmacists were then invited to classify medication discrepancies from a number of fictitious cases (adapted from authentic cases) using the taxonomy. RESULTS: The medication discrepancy taxonomy (MedTax) comprises 12 main types and 28 sub-types of discrepancies. A set of operational instructions and definitions to aid the use of the taxonomy was formulated. The overall Average content validity index (Ave-CVI) was 0.93 and interrater reliability was 0.67 (multirater κfree), indicating substantial agreement. An excellent internal consistency of the taxonomy was established (Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20) = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: A content valid and reliable taxonomy for classifying medication discrepancies was developed. The MedTax may be used to classify medication discrepancies identified following medication reconciliation services. The clear and consistent reporting of medication discrepancies arising from medication reconciliation services may be of value to policy makers, healthcare professionals and researchers, when evaluating such services. The MedTax was designed to fill an essential void in global endeavors to reinforce standardization of medication reconciliation practices and to improve medication safety across transitions of care.

Adecuación de la historia farmacoterapéutica y errores de conciliación en un servicio de urgencias / Accuracy in the medication history and reconciliation errors in the emergency department

Fundamento y objetivo: Evaluar la calidad de la historia farmacoterapéutica registrada en un servicio de urgencias hospitalario (SUH) de un hospital de tercer nivel. Determinar la prevalencia de errores de conciliación (EC). Material y método: Estudio unicéntrico, prospectivo y de intervención. Se comparó la lista de medicación habitual obtenida por un farmacéutico frente a la registrada por el médico para identificar discrepancias. Posteriormente, se comparó la medicación habitual con la prescripción activa (SUH). Todas las discrepancias no justificadas se comentaron con el médico para determinar si se trataba de un EC. Se realizó un análisis univariante para identificar factores asociados con la aparición de EC. Resultados: El farmacéutico identificó un mayor número de fármacos habituales por paciente respecto al médico (6,89 frente a 5,70; p < 0,05). Únicamente el 39% de los fármacos identificados por el médico se registraron correctamente en la historia clínica. La principal causa de discrepancia fue la omisión de información a nivel de fármaco (39%) o de posología (33%). Se detectaron 157 EC que afectaron a 85 pacientes (43%), mayoritariamente por omisión (62%). Los principales factores asociados a EC fueron la edad y la polimedicación. La presencia de un cuidador/familiar responsable de la medicación fue un factor protector. No se encontró asociación entre discrepancias en el registro y EC. Conclusiones: La recogida de la historia farmacoterapéutica es un proceso susceptible de mejora. El farmacéutico puede ayudar a obtener una anamnesis de calidad e incrementar la seguridad del paciente interceptando EC. Es necesario mejorar los sistemas de información para evitar este tipo de incidentes (AU)

Background and objective: To assess the accuracy of pharmaceutical anamnesis obtained at the Emergency Department (ED) of a tertiary referral hospital and to determine the prevalence of medication reconciliation errors (RE). Material and method: This was a single-center, prospective, interventional study. The home medication list obtained by a pharmacist was compared with the one recorded by a doctor to identify inaccuracies. Subsequently, the home medication list was compared with the active prescription at the ED. All unexplained discrepancies were checked with the doctor in charge to evaluate if a RE has occurred. An univariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with RE. Results: The pharmacist identified a higher number of drugs than doctors (6.89 versus 5.70; P < 0.05). Only 39% of the drugs obtained by doctors were properly written down in the patient's record. The main cause of discrepancy was omission of information regarding the name of the drug (39%) or its dosage (33%). One hundred and fifty-seven RE were identified and they affected 85 patients (43%), mainly related to information omission (62%). Age and polymedication were identified as main risk factors of RE. The presence of a caregiver or relative in the ED was judged to be a protective factor. No relationship was found between inaccuracies in the registries and RE. Conclusions: The process of obtaining a proper pharmaceutical anamnesis still needs improvement. The pharmacist may play a role in the process of obtaining a good quality anamnesis and increase patient safety by detecting RE. Better information systems are needed to avoid this type of incidents (AU)

Programa de conciliación entre neumología y farmacia como herramienta en la atención al paciente / No disponible

Introducción: La conciliación de la medicación (CM) es el proceso que compara el tratamiento farmacológico previo del paciente con el prescrito tras una transición asistencial. En el ámbito hospitalario, es una estrategia que permite minimizar errores de medicación. Nuestro objetivo es analizar el impacto de la implantación de un circuito de CM entre neumología y farmacia al ingreso y al alta. Pacientes y métodos: Se incluyeron pacientes polimedicados ingresados en neumología entre mayo-2012 y diciembre-2013. Se evaluaron: número de discrepancias al ingreso y alta, tipos de discrepancias no justificadas, gravedad, grado de aceptación del neumólogo, número de fármacos. Resultados: Se conciliaron al alta 507 pacientes de 818 altas (61,8%). En 2012 se conciliaron al alta 134 pacientes, detectándose 134 discrepancias en 63 pacientes (47%), con una media de 2,12 discrepancias/paciente. Se entregaron 161 medicamentos de uso limitado. En 2013 se conciliaron al ingreso 318 pacientes. Se detectaron 226 discrepancias en 130 pacientes (40,9%). Se conciliaron al alta 373 pacientes de 554 altas (67,32%), detectándose 139 discrepancias en 96 pacientes (25,7%) con una media de 1,4 discrepancias/paciente. Se entregaron 520 medicamentos de uso limitado. El análisis comparativo al alta entre mayo-diciembre 2012/2013, mostró un aumento en el número de pacientes conciliados (50,8% vs 62,9%) y disminución significativa del número de pacientes con discrepancias del 47% al 22,4% (p=0,001). Conclusiones: El descenso en el número de discrepancias por paciente demuestra que la CM es una eficaz herramienta al ingreso y al alta, obteniéndose con la misma una racionalización del uso de fármacos. La perspectiva futura es fomentar la colaboración atención primaria-especializada. Sería necesario realizar estudios para evaluar el impacto sobre los reingresos

Introduction: Medication conciliation (MC) is the process of comparing the previous pharmaceutical treatment of the patient with the prescribed treatment after transitional medical assistance. It´s a strategy to minimize medicational errors within the hospital.Our goal is to analyze the impact of the implementation of a circuit of MC between pulmonology and pharmacy at admission and discharge. Methods: Polymedicated patients that were hospitalized in pulmonology between May 2012 and December 2013 were included. There were evaluated: number of discrepancies at admission and discharge, different types of not justified discrepancies, severity, acceptability of the pulmonologist and number of drugs. Results: There were 818 patients admited, 507 of which were conciliated at time of discharge (61.8%). In 2012, 134 patients were conciliated at the time of discharge detecting 134 discrepancies in 63 patients (47%), with an average of 2.12 discrepancies/patient. 161 drugs were distributed for limited use. In 2013, 318 patients were conciliated at the time of admission. There were 226 discrepancies detected in 130 patients (40.9%). At the time of discharge 373 patients were conciliated from 554 patients (67.32%), 139 discrepancies detected in 96 patients (25.7%) with a mean of 1.4 discrepancies/patient. 520 drugs were distributed for limited use. The comparative analysis of admissions between May 2012 and December 2013 showed an increase in the number of conciliated patients (50.8% and 62.9%) and a significant decrease in the number of patients with discrepancies of 47% to 22.4% (p=0,001). Conclusions: The decrease in the number of discrepancies per patient demonstrates that MC is an effective tool at admission and discharge, obtaining there in a rational use of drugs. The future vision is to foster the collaboration between primary and specialized care. Further studies would be necessary to evaluate the impact on readmissions

Identifying opportunities to improve medication management in transitions of care.

PURPOSE: The types and causes of medication discrepancies during the transition from inpatient to ambulatory care were investigated. METHODS: A descriptive study was conducted at an academic outpatient group practice affiliated with a private nonacademic hospital to (1) describe discrepancies between inpatient discharge summaries and patient-reported medication lists, (2) identify patient and system factors related to breakdowns in medication documentation, and (3) determine reasons for medication discrepancies. During a four-month period, 17 patients at high risk for medication misadventures while transitioning from hospital care to outpatient follow-up were contacted by telephone soon after discharge and asked to provide information on all medications they were taking. Patient-reported medication lists were compared with the corresponding discharge summaries, and medication discrepancies were categorized by patient- and system-level factors using a validated instrument. RESULTS: Of the total of 96 discrepancies identified, more than two thirds (n = 67, 68%) involved the omission of a prescribed medication from either the patient-reported list or the discharge summary. Cardiovascular medications, including antihypertensives, antilipemics, diuretics, and antiarrhythmics, accounted for almost one quarter of all medication discrepancies. About 15% (n = 14) and 16% (n = 15) of identified discrepancies related to medication dose and frequency, respectively. CONCLUSION: Among 17 patients transitioning from inpatient to outpatient care, nearly 100 discrepancies between patient-reported medication lists and discharge summaries were identified. Most discrepancies were attributed to nonintentional nonadherence and resumption of home medications without instructions to do so. All 17 patients had at least 1 medication discrepancy categorized as involving a system-level factor.

[Development of patient-specific issues in relation to medicines is a challenge to all health-care professionals].

As a consequence of implementing clinical pharmacy at hospitals in Denmark, the need of defining some of the services delivered appeared: medication anamnesis, medication reconciliation, medication review and prescription review. Consensus was reached on the definitions with qualification by 20 colleagues from hospital pharmacies throughout the country as well as from external stakeholders. As an additional benefit, the definitions could cover the pharmacy services performed in primary care as well, which may help improve communication in the interface management of medication treatment.

Medical reconciliation in patients discharged from the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors are considered to be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. For each patient, emergency departments (EDs) are expected to compile a list of medications, reconcile them, and pass them along to the next provider. The electronic medical record provides a method to automatically capture and propagate what may be incorrect information. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the medication information that patients ultimately discharged from the ED provide to the ED staff vs. the medication information the patients provide at follow-up, and to classify and quantify the types of discrepancies between the two. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective descriptive study of a convenience sample of 36 patients who were discharged from the ED and who reported taking five or more medications. Discrepancies were identified by comparing information collected at the time of the index ED visit with that gleaned from follow-up contact within 7 days of discharge. RESULTS: Of the 36 charts analyzed, 286 medications were provided by patients at the time of their ED visit. Subsequent determination of actual medication use on follow-up found 120 discrepancies, for a discrepancy rate of 42.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 36.4-47.8%). One or more discrepancies were found on 86.1% of charts (95% CI 74.8-97.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Frequent discrepancies are found in the medication information that patients provide in the ED. Requiring the ED to reconcile medication information and to pass it on to the next provider can be a source of treatment errors in the outpatient setting.

Procesos hospitalarios y unidades funcionales / No disponible

No disponible