| 1. |
- Al-Hashar, Amna, et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of medication reconciliation and review and counselling, on adverse drug events and healthcare resource use
- 2018
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy. - : Springer. - 2210-7703 .- 2210-7711. ; 40:5, s. 1154-1164
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Adverse drug events from preventable medication errors can result in patient morbidity and mortality, and in cost to the healthcare system. Medication reconciliation can improve communication and reduce medication errors at transitions in care. Objective Evaluate the impact of medication reconciliation and counselling intervention delivered by a pharmacist for medical patients on clinical outcomes 30 days after discharge. Setting Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Muscat, Oman. Methods A randomized controlled study comparing standard care with an intervention delivered by a pharmacist and comprising medication reconciliation on admission and discharge, a medication review, a bedside medication counselling, and a take-home medication list. Medication discrepancies during hospitalization were identified and reconciled. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by reviewing electronic health records and telephone interviews. Main outcome measures Rates of preventable adverse drug events as primary outcome and healthcare resource utilization as secondary outcome at 30 days post discharge. Results A total of 587 patients were recruited (56 ± 17 years, 57% female); 286 randomized to intervention; 301 in the standard care group. In intervention arm, 74 (26%) patients had at least one discrepancy on admission and 100 (35%) on discharge. Rates of preventable adverse drug events were significantly lower in intervention arm compared to standard care arm (9.1 vs. 16%, p = 0.009). No significant difference was found in healthcare resource use. Conclusion The implementation of an intervention comprising medication reconciliation and counselling by a pharmacist has significantly reduced the rate of preventable ADEs 30 days post discharge, compared to the standard care. The effect of the intervention on healthcare resource use was insignificant. Pharmacists should be included in decentralized, patient-centred roles. The findings should be interpreted in the context of the study's limitations.
|
|
| 2. |
- Al-Hashar, Amna, et al.
(författare)
-
Whose responsibility is medication reconciliation : Physicians, pharmacists or nurses? A survey in an academic tertiary care hospital
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal. - : Elsevier BV. - 1319-0164. ; 25:1, s. 52-58
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Medication errors occur frequently at transitions in care and can result in morbidity and mortality. Medication reconciliation is a recognized hospital accreditation requirement and designed to limit errors in transitions in care. Objectives: To identify beliefs, perceived roles and responsibilities of physicians, pharmacists and nurses prior to the implementation of a standardized medication reconciliation process. Methods: A survey was distributed to the three professions: pharmacists in the pharmacy and physicians and nurses in hospital in-patient units. It contained questions about the current level of medication reconciliation practices, as well as perceived roles and responsibilities of each profession when a standardized process is implemented. Value, barriers to implementing medication reconciliation and the role of information technology were also assessed. Analyses were performed using univariate statistics. Results: There was a lack of clarity of current medication reconciliation practices as well as lack of agreement between the three professions. Physicians and pharmacists considered their professions as the main providers while nurses considered physicians followed by themselves as the main providers with limited roles for pharmacists. The three professions recognize the values and benefits of medication reconciliation yet pharmacists, more than others, stated limited time to implement reconciliation is a major barrier. Obstacles such as unreliable sources of medication history, patient knowledge and lack of coordination and communication between the three professions were expressed. Conclusions: The three health care professions recognize the value of medication reconciliation and want to see it implemented in the hospital, yet there is a lack of agreement with regard to roles and responsibilities of each profession within the process. This needs to be addressed by the hospital administration to design clear procedures and defined roles for each profession within a standardized medication reconciliation process.
|
|
