scholarly journals LO51: Incidence of clinically relevant medication errors after implementation of an electronic medication reconciliation process

CJEM ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (S1) ◽  
pp. S45
Author(s):  
K.R. Stockton ◽  
M.E. Wickham ◽  
S. Lai ◽  
K. Badke ◽  
D. Villanyi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medication Errors ◽  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Medication Discrepancies ◽  
Commission Errors ◽  
Regression Methods ◽  
Independent Panel ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Available Information

Introduction: Medication discrepancies are unintended differences between a patient’s outpatient and inpatient medication regimens, and occur in up to 60% of hospital admissions. Canadian emergency departments (EDs) have implemented medication reconciliation forms that are pre-populated with outpatient medication dispensing data in order to reduce medication discrepancies and resultant adverse drug events. However, these forms may introduce errors of commission by prompting prescribers to reorder discontinued or potentially harmful medications. Our objective was to evaluate the incidence of medication discrepancies and errors of commission after the implementation of pre-populated medication reconciliation forms. Methods: This chart review included admitted patients who were enrolled in a parent study in which a research pharmacist prospectively collected best-possible medication histories (BPMHs) in the ED using all available information sources. Following discharge, research assistants uninvolved with the parent study compared medication orders documented within 48 h of admission with the BPMH to identify medication discrepancies and errors of commission. Errors of commission were defined as inappropriate continuations of medications and reordering discontinued medications. An independent panel adjudicated the clinical significance of the errors. We used regression methods to identify factors associated with errors. The sample size was limited by enrolment into the parent study. Results: Of 151 patients, 71 (47%; 95%CI 39.2-54.9) were exposed to 112 medication errors. Of these errors, 75.9% (85/112; 95%CI 67.1-82.9) were discrepancies, of which 18.8% (16/85; 95%CI 12.0-28.4) were clinically significant. Errors of commission made up 24.1% (27/112; 95%CI 17.3-32.8) of all errors, of which 37.0% (10/27; 95%CI 18.8-55.2) were clinically significant. Taking 8 or more medications was associated with a 5-fold greater odds of experiencing a medication error after controlling for confounders (OR 5.00; 95%CI 2.45-10.17; p<0.001). Conclusion: Clinically significant medication discrepancies and errors of commission remain common despite the implementation of electronically pre-populated medication reconciliation forms. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate whether using pre-populated medication reconciliation forms increases the risk of introducing errors of commission.

scholarly journals Engaging hospital patients in the medication reconciliation process using tablet computers

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 1460-1469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer E Prey ◽  
Fernanda Polubriaginof ◽  
Lisa V Grossman ◽  
Ruth Masterson Creber ◽  
Demetra Tsapepas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medication Review ◽  
Medication Safety ◽  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Medication List ◽  
Medication Discrepancies ◽  
Home Medication ◽  
Verbal Participation ◽  
Hospital Patients ◽  
Home Medication Review

Abstract Objective Unintentional medication discrepancies contribute to preventable adverse drug events in patients. Patient engagement in medication safety beyond verbal participation in medication reconciliation is limited. We conducted a pilot study to determine whether patients’ use of an electronic home medication review tool could improve medication safety during hospitalization. Materials and Methods Patients were randomized to use a toolbefore orafter hospital admission medication reconciliation to review and modify their home medication list. We assessed the quantity, potential severity, and potential harm of patients’ and clinicians’ medication changes. We also surveyed clinicians to assess the tool’s usefulness. Results Of 76 patients approached, 65 (86%) participated. Forty-eight (74%) made changes to their home medication list [before: 29 (81%),after: 19 (66%),p = .170].Before group participants identified 57 changes that clinicians subsequently missed on admission medication reconciliation. Thirty-nine (74%) had a significant or greater potential severity, and 19 (36%) had a greater than 50-50 chance of harm.After group patients identified 68 additional changes to their reconciled medication lists. Fifty-one (75%) had a significant or greater potential severity, and 33 (49%) had a greater than 50-50 chance of harm. Clinicians reported believing that the tool would save time, and patients would supply useful information. Discussion The results demonstrate a high willingness of patients to engage in medication reconciliation, and show that patients were able to identify important medication discrepancies and often changes that clinicians missed. Conclusion Engaging patients in admission medication reconciliation using an electronic home medication review tool may improve medication safety during hospitalization.

scholarly journals Ambulatory Medication Reconciliation in Dialysis Patients: Benefits and Community Practitioners’ Perspectives

2017 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo-Anne S Wilson ◽  
Matthew A Ladda ◽  
Jaclyn Tran ◽  
Marsha Wood ◽  
Penelope Poyah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Community Pharmacists ◽  
Family Physicians ◽  
Dialysis Patients ◽  
Medication Discrepancies ◽  
Personnel Infirmier ◽  
Étude De Cohorte ◽  
Potential Level

<p><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Ambulatory medication reconciliation can reduce the frequency of medication discrepancies and may also reduce adverse drug events. Patients receiving dialysis are at high risk for medication discrepancies because they typically have multiple comorbid conditions, are taking many medications, and are receiving care from many practitioners. Little is known about the potential benefits of ambulatory medication reconciliation for these patients.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the number, type, and potential level of harm associated with medication discrepancies identified through ambulatory medication reconciliation and to ascertain the views of community pharmacists and family physicians about this service.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study involved patients initiating hemodialysis who received ambulatory medication reconciliation in a hospital renal program over the period July 2014 to July 2016. Discrepanciesidentified on the medication reconciliation forms for study patients were extracted and categorized by discrepancy type and potential level of harm. The level of harm was determined independently by a pharmacist and a nurse practitioner using a defined scoring system. In the event of disagreement, a nephrologist determined the final score. Surveys were sent to 52 community pharmacists and 44 family physicians involved in the care of study patients to collect their opinions and perspectives on ambulatory medication reconciliation.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> Ambulatory medication reconciliation was conducted 296 times for a total of 147 hemodialysis patients. The mean number of discrepancies identified per patient was 1.31 (standard deviation 2.00). Overall, 30% of these discrepancies were deemed to have the potential to cause moderate to severe patient discomfort or clinical deterioration. Survey results indicated that community practitioners found ambulatory medication reconciliation valuable for providing quality care to dialysis patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study has provided evidence that ambulatory medication reconciliation can increase patient safety and potentially prevent adverse events associated with medication discrepancies.</p><p><strong>RÉSUMÉ</strong></p><p><strong>Contexte : </strong>Le bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires peut réduire les divergences au chapitre des médicaments et les événements indésirables liés aux médicaments. Les divergences relatives aux médicaments représentent un risque élevé pour les patients dialysés, car ils souffrent normalement de multiples troubles comorbides, ils prennent souvent de nombreux médicaments et ils sont soignés par bon nombre de praticiens. Peu d’information existe sur les possibles avantages du bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires pour ces patients.</p><p><strong>Objectifs : </strong>Déterminer le nombre et la catégorie des divergences concernant les médicaments constatées lors d’un bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires ainsi que la gravité potentielle des préjudices consécutifs. De plus, établir la position des pharmaciens communautaires et des médecins de famille sur cette modalité du bilan comparatif des médicaments.</p><p><strong>Méthodes : </strong>La présente étude de cohorte rétrospective a été menée auprès de patients amorçant un traitement par hémodialyse pour qui un bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires a été réalisé dans le cadre d’un programme hospitalier des maladies du rein, entre juillet 2014 et juillet 2016. Les divergences trouvées dans les formulaires de bilan comparatif des médicaments ont été classées par catégorie et selon la gravité potentielle des préjudices. Le niveau du préjudice a été déterminé de manière indépendante par un pharmacien et un membre du personnel infirmier praticien à l’aide d’un système de notation défini. En cas de désaccord, le score final était établi par un néphrologue. Des sondages ont été envoyés à 52 pharmaciens communautaires et à 44 médecins de famille prodiguant des soins aux participants afin qu’ils expriment leurs opinions et leurs points de vue sur le bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires.</p><p><strong>Résultats : </strong>En tout, 296 bilans comparatifs des médicaments en soins ambulatoires ont été effectués auprès de 147 patients hémodialysés. Le nombre moyen de divergences constatées par patient était de 1,31 (écart-type de 2,00). Dans l’ensemble, 30 % de ces divergences ont été considérées comme une source potentielle d’un inconfort allant de modéré à grave ou de dégradation clinique. Selon les résultats du sondage, les praticiens communautaires ont jugé le bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires utile à la prestation de soins de qualité aux patients dialysés.</p><p><strong>Conclusions : </strong>D’après les résultats de l’étude, le bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires augmenterait la sécurité des patients et pourrait prévenir les événements indésirables liés aux divergences relatives aux médicaments.</p>

Evaluation of Adverse Drug Events and Medication Discrepancies in Transitions of Care Between Hospital Discharge and Primary Care Follow-Up

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Becky L. Armor ◽  
Avery J. Wight ◽  
Sandra M. Carter
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Medication Management ◽  
Transitions Of Care ◽  
Therapeutic Monitoring ◽  
Medication List ◽  
Medication Discrepancies

Approximately two-thirds of adverse events posthospital discharge are due to medication-related problems. Medication reconciliation is a strategy to reduce medication errors and improve patient safety. Objective: To evaluate adverse drug events (ADEs), potential ADEs (pADEs), and medication discrepancies occurring between hospital discharge and primary care follow-up in an academic family medicine clinic. Adult patients recently discharged from the hospital were seen by a pharmacist for medication reconciliation between September 1, 2011, and November 30, 2012. The pharmacist identified medication discrepancies and pADEs or ADEs from a best possible medication history obtained from the electronic medical record (EMR) and hospital medication list. In 43 study participants, an average of 2.9 ADEs or pADEs was identified ( N = 124). The most common ADEs/pADEs identified were nonadherence/underuse (18%), untreated medical problems (15%), and lack of therapeutic monitoring (13%). An average of 3.9 medication discrepancies per participant was identified (N = 171), with 81% of participants experiencing at least 1 discrepancy. The absence of a complete and accurate medication list at hospital discharge is a barrier to comprehensive medication management. Strategies to improve medication management during care transitions are needed in primary care.

Discrepancies Identified Through a Telephone-Based, Student-Led Initiative for Medication Reconciliation in Ambulatory Psychiatry

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 304-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie E. Albano ◽  
Jolene R. Bostwick ◽  
Kristen M. Ward ◽  
Thomas Fluent ◽  
Hae Mi Choe
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Pharmacy Practice ◽  
Pharmacy Students ◽  
Prescription Medications ◽  
Medication Discrepancies ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Practice Experience ◽  
Call Schedule ◽  
Clinically Significant

Purpose: To identify the number of medication discrepancies following establishment of a telephone-based, introductory pharmacy practice experience student-driven, medication reconciliation service for new patients in an ambulatory psychiatry clinic. Secondarily, to identify factors impacting medication discrepancies to better target medication profiles to reconcile and to evaluate whether the implementation of a call schedule effected clinic no-show rates. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of a telephone-based medication reconciliation service from June 2014 to January 2016. Results: At least 1 medication discrepancy was identified among 84.7% of medication profiles (N = 438), with a total of 1416 medication discrepancies reconciled (3.2 discrepancies per patient). Of the 1416 discrepancies, 38.6% were deletions, 38.9% were additions, and 22.5% were changes in dosage strength or frequency. Discrepancies pertaining to prescription medications totaled 57.8%. Student pharmacists were critical team members in the service. Patient’s age, number of medications on the patient’s list, and number of days since the last medication reconciliation were not clinically significant determinants for targeting medication profiles. There was a statistically significant reduction in the clinic no-show rates following implementation of a call schedule compared with no-show rates prior to call schedule implementation. Conclusion: This student pharmacist–led telephone medication reconciliation service demonstrated the importance of medication reconciliation in ambulatory psychiatry by identifying numerous discrepancies within this population. Further, we demonstrated pharmacy students across various levels of education can assist in this process under the supervision of a pharmacist.

A FORMAL MEDICATION RECONCILIATION PROGRAMME IN A HAEMODIALYSIS UNIT CAN IDENTIFY MEDICATION DISCREPANCIES AND POTENTIALLY PREVENT ADVERSE DRUG EVENTS

2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Winnie WY Chan ◽  
Geetha Mahalingam ◽  
Robert MA Richardson ◽  
Olavo A Fernandes ◽  
Marisa Battistella
Keyword(s):  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Medication Discrepancies

scholarly journals Electronic tools to support medication reconciliation: a systematic review

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Marien ◽  
Bruno Krug ◽  
Anne Spinewine
Keyword(s):  
User Satisfaction ◽  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Medication History ◽  
Quality Of Reporting ◽  
Medication Discrepancies

Objectives: Medication reconciliation (MedRec) is essential for reducing patient harm caused by medication discrepancies across care transitions. Electronic support has been described as a promising approach to moving MedRec forward. We systematically reviewed the evidence about electronic tools that support MedRec, by (a) identifying tools; (b) summarizing their characteristics with regard to context, tool, implementation, and evaluation; and (c) summarizing key messages for successful development and implementation. Materials and Methods: We searched PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library, and identified additional reports from reference lists, reviews, and patent databases. Reports were included if the electronic tool supported medication history taking and the identification and resolution of medication discrepancies. Two researchers independently selected studies, evaluated the quality of reporting, and extracted data. Results: Eighteen reports relative to 11 tools were included. There were eight quality improvement projects, five observational effectiveness studies, three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or RCT protocols (ie, descriptions of RCTs in progress), and two patents. All tools were developed in academic environments in North America. Most used electronic data from multiple sources and partially implemented functionalities considered to be important. Relevant information on functionalities and implementation features was frequently missing. Evaluations mainly focused on usability, adherence, and user satisfaction. One RCT evaluated the effect on potential adverse drug events. Conclusion: Successful implementation of electronic tools to support MedRec requires favorable context, properly designed tools, and attention to implementation features. Future research is needed to evaluate the effect of these tools on the quality and safety of healthcare.

Medication Reconciliation at Hospital Discharge: Evaluating Discrepancies

2008 ◽  
Vol 42 (10) ◽  
pp. 1373-1379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline D Wong ◽  
Jana M Bajcar ◽  
Gary G Wong ◽  
Shabbir MH Alibhai ◽  
Jin-Hyeun Huh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Clinical Impact ◽  
Medication Discrepancies ◽  
Medication Discrepancy ◽  
General Internal ◽  
Discharge Medication ◽  
Number Of Patients

Background: Hospital discharge is an interlace of care when patients are at a high risk of medication discrepancies as they transition from hospital to home. These discrepancies are important, as they may contribute to drug-related problems, medication errors, and adverse drug events. Objective: To Identify, characterize, and assess the clinical impact of unintentional medication discrepancies at hospital discharge. Methods: All consecutive general internal medicine patients admitted for at least 72 hours to a tertiary care teaching hospital were prospectively assessed. Patients were excluded if they were discharged with verbal prescriptions; died during hospitalization; or transferred from or to a nursing home, another institution, or another unit within the same hospital. The primary endpoint was to determine the number of patients with at least one unintended medication discrepancy on hospital discharge. Medication discrepancies were assessed through comparison of a best possible medication discharge list with the actual discharge prescriptions. Secondary objectives were to characterize and assess the potential clinical impact of the unintentional discrepancies. Results: From March 14,2006, to June 2,2006,430 patients were screened for eligibility; 150 patients were included in the study. Overall, 106 (70.7%) patients had at least one actual or potential unintentional discrepancy. Sixty-two patients (41.3%) had at least one actual unintentional medication discrepancy al hospital discharge and 83 patients (55.3%) had at least one potential unintentional discrepancy. The most common unintentional discrepancies were an incomplete prescription requiring clarification, which could result in a patient delay in obtaining medications (49.5%), and the omission of medications (22.9%). Of the 105 unintentional discrepancies, 31 (29.5%) had the potential to cause possible or probable patient discomfort and/or clinical deterioration. Conclusions: Medication discrepancies occur commonly on hospital discharge. Understanding the type and frequency of discrepancies can help clinicians better understand ways to prevent them. Structured medication reconciliation may help to prevent discharge medication discrepancies.

scholarly journals Avoiding a Med-Wreck: a structured medication reconciliation framework and standardized auditing tool utilized to optimize patient safety and reallocate hospital resources

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Elbeddini ◽  
Sarah Almasalkhi ◽  
Thulasika Prabaharan ◽  
Cindy Tran ◽  
Mohamed Gazarin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Medication Errors ◽  
Continuous Quality Improvement ◽  
Medication Reconciliation ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
Hospital Readmissions ◽  
Care Facility ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Continuous Quality

Abstract Background The incidence of preventable adverse drug events (ADE) is approximately one medication error per patient per hospital-day. A quality medication reconciliation (MedRec) process is a crucial intervention used to reduce ADE in the hospital and community setting. Amid the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, preventing medication errors is vital to avoid patient readmission, reduce disease complications, and reduce cost and patient burden on the healthcare system. Objectives To develop a standardized MedRec framework that can be implemented in all healthcare settings to reduce patient and staff harm during COVID-19. Also, to create a standardized auditing tool used to assess the quality of the MedRec process and allow for continuous quality improvement. Methods A multi-site gap analysis (MGA) was performed to collect observational data that were collected from four different healthcare sites (two hospitals, a long-term care facility, and a community pharmacy). MGA consists of collecting data across several sites which answer a standardized questionnaire. A standardized MedRec framework and auditing tool were developed based on the gaps observed in each site and literature reviews. Results A standardized MedRec process was not implemented in any of the observed sites. The healthcare sites lacked a designated MedRec team and training related to the MedRec process leading to multiple discrepancies at discharge. Patients were not counselled on changes to home medications, and a discharge report was often not provided upon discharge. Communication mechanisms between community pharmacies and hospital physicians are not available or easily accessible. Conclusion The proposed structured MedRec framework is vital to reduce medication errors and patient harm amid COVID-19. Moreover, the comprehensive auditing tool developed in this study allows for continuous quality improvement resulting in superior quality care, reduction of workflow inefficiencies, cost savings on hospital readmissions, and overall enhanced healthcare system performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document