Interventions to Improve Medication Reconciliation in Primary Care

Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy (Impact Factor: 2.92). 10/2009; 43(10):1667-75. DOI: 10.1345/aph.1M059
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To systematically review all primary care intervention studies designed to implement medication reconciliation for effects on medication discrepancies, clinical outcomes, and patient knowledge of their medications.
We searched MEDLINE (1988-March 2008); Healthstar (1966-March 2008); CINAHL (1982-March 2008); EMBASE (1980-March 2008); Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Methodology Register, and Health Technology Assessments; and unpublished material. No language restrictions were applied. Search terms included medication reconciliation, medication errors, prescribing error, medication systems, adverse drug events, drug utilization review, medication list, medication record, and medications management.
Randomized controlled trials or before-and-after studies that examined the effect of various interventions on medication discrepancies either in ambulatory settings or at hospital discharge among community-dwelling adults were included. Two reviewers independently assessed studies to determine inclusion. Level of agreement between the reviewers was good, with unweighted Cohen's kappa of 0.71. Two of 3 independent reviewers abstracted data and evaluated validity from included studies. Disagreements between reviewers were resolved by consensus.
Four trials met the inclusion criteria. Two before-and-after studies (n = 275) in ambulatory care examining systematic medication reconciliation at each visit produced conflicting results. One study showed a reduction in the proportion of medication discrepancies from 88.5% to 49.1% (OR 0.13; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.21); the other showed no benefit. One randomized controlled trial and one before-and-after study (n = 202) evaluated pharmacist medication review at hospital discharge. Neither showed a benefit. Heterogeneity precluded pooling of studies. All included studies had significant design flaws.
There is no good quality evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of medication reconciliation in the primary care setting. Further research is needed.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To describe the types and causes of medication discrepancies in the electronic medical record identified by pharmacist medication reconciliation during outpatient medical visits and to identify patient characteristics associated with the presence of discrepancies. Observational case series study. Indigent primary care clinic in Pittsburgh, PA, from April 2009 to May 2010. 219 adults presenting for follow-up medical visits and self-reporting medication use. Medication reconciliation as part of patient interview and concurrent chart review. Frequency, types, and reasons for medication discrepancies and demographic variables, patient knowledge, and adherence. Of 219 patients interviewed, 162 (74%) had at least one discrepancy. The most common type of discrepancy was an incorrect medication documented on the chart. The most common reasons included over-the-counter (OTC) use of medications and patients not reporting use of medications. The presence of one or more medication discrepancies was associated with the use of three or more medications. Patient factors such as gender, age, and race were not associated with discrepancies. Patients able to recall the strength for more than 75% of their medications had fewer discrepancies, while knowledge of the medication name, indication, or regimen had no association with discrepancies. Pharmacists play a critical role in identifying discrepancies between charted medication lists and self-reported medication use, independent of adherence. Inaccuracies in charted medications are frequent and often are related to use of OTC therapies and lack of communication and documentation during physician office visits. Knowledge of patient-related variables and other reasons for discrepancies may be useful in identifying patients at greatest risk for discrepancies and interventions to prevent and resolve them.
    Journal of the American Pharmacists Association 01/2012; 52(1):59-66. DOI:10.1331/JAPhA.2012.10123
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We seek to reduce the latency of division operations. In many programs arithmetic instructions are frequently executed on the same inputs. Previous work has exploited this property by caching the quotient, bypassing the divider in the case of a cache hit. We propose caching a portion of the quotient, allowing a reduction in the cache size and an increase in cache hit rates. We call this approach partial caching. We present modifications to digit-recurrence division methods to accommodate partial caching. Using several benchmarks, we measure the hit rate and speedup which can be obtained.
    Signals, Systems and Computers, 2002. Conference Record of the Thirty-Sixth Asilomar Conference on; 12/2002
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Medication errors are a common cause of poor clinical outcomes. Information on perioperative medication errors is scarce. This study was aimed at identifying the nature, cause, and potential remedies for medication errors in otolaryngologic surgery. Prospective and descriptive. Clinicians were incentivized for reporting possible medication errors that occurred from the preoperative through the first postoperative clinic visit over a 2-month period. Each report was investigated by an expert panel to determine validity, preventability, contributing factors, and potential preventative measures. A random sample of procedures and clinic visits were monitored for compliance with safe medication practices and information flow. From 589 surgeries, 20 medication errors were reported (two preoperative, four operative, five during hospital admission, two in transition between services, four during discharge, and three postoperative). Errors included wrong dose (seven), omitted dose (six), wrong drug (five), wrong site (two), and unnecessary drug (one). Causes included failure to consider weight-based dosing, use accurate drug references, calculate the total medication supply needed, verify the administration site, consider pertinent patient information (e.g., allergies), reconcile medications upon transfers, and document medication histories. Use of preprinted order forms was flawed, and discharge instructions were insufficient to guide patients postoperatively. Failure to adhere to safe medication-use practices occurred throughout perioperative care. Improvement in medication documentation, following established safe practices, integration of patient information in prescribing decisions, and use of clinical decision support systems appear necessary to prevent perioperative medication errors in otolaryngology.
    The Laryngoscope 01/2010; 120(6):1214-9. DOI:10.1002/lary.20922 · 2.03 Impact Factor