Article

Potential Risk of Medication Discrepancies and Reconciliation Errors at Admission and Discharge from an Inpatient Medical Service

Pharmacy Department, Hospital Universitario Doctor Peset, Valencia, Spain.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy (Impact Factor: 2.92). 10/2010; 44(11):1747-54. DOI: 10.1345/aph.1P184
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Medication discrepancies, defined as unexplained variations among drug regimens at care transitions, are common. Some are unintended and cause reconciliation errors that are potentially detrimental for patients.
To determine the prevalence of medication discrepancies and reconciliation errors at admission and discharge in hospitalized patients and explore risk factors for reconciliation errors and their potential clinical impact.
An observational prospective study was conducted at a general teaching hospital. Patients who were admitted to the internal medicine service and were receiving chronic preadmission treatment were included in the study. Preadmission treatment was compared with the treatment prescribed on admission (first 48 hours) and at hospital discharge, and discrepancies and reconciliation errors were identified. The primary endpoint was the presence of reconciliation errors at admission and/or discharge. Potential risk factors (patient-, medication-, and system-related) for reconciliation errors were analyzed using a multivariate logistic regression model.
Of the 120 patients enrolled in the study between April and August 2009, 109 (90.8%) showed 513 discrepancies. The prevalence of patients with reconciliation errors was 20.8% (95% CI 13.6 to 28.1). Intended medication discrepancies were more frequent at admission (96.6%) than at discharge (75.5%), while reconciliation errors were more frequent at discharge (24.5%) than at admission (3.4%). The prevalence ratio (admission vs discharge) was 2.4 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.0) for discrepancies and 0.65 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.32) for reconciliation errors. The logistic regression analysis revealed an association between the number of discrepancies at admission (OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.44) and age (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.10) and an increased risk of reconciliation errors.
Medication reconciliation strategies should focus primarily on avoiding errors at discharge. Since medication discrepancies at admission may predispose patients to reconciliation errors, early detection of such discrepancies would logically reduce the risk of reconciliation errors. Medication reconciliation programs must implement a process for gathering accurate preadmission drug histories and must submit this information to a critical assessment of patients' needs.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Arturo Artero, Aug 28, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
125 Views
  • Source
    • "Regarding the qualification of persons assessing the potential clinical impact of ME, some studies have involved only physicians [5] [6] [8] [11] [14] [15], others both physicians and pharmacists or other health care professionals [7,10,12, 13,16–20]. Moreover, individual scorings have been found in 11 studies [5–8,12,14–17,19,20] while consensual ratings where all evaluators meet together have been found in 4 studies [10] [11] [13] [18]. None of these scoring methods has been validated and used in a multi-centre study. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Medication reconciliation is a powerful process to correct medication errors (ME) resulting from miscommunicated information at transitions of care. This study aims to develop and evaluate a scoring method for assessing the severity of potential harm of ME intercepted by medication reconciliation at hospital admission in elderly. The development of the scoring method was based on a literature search and the creation of a list of high-risk drugs used in outpatient care. The evaluation of the method was carried out in 7 French hospitals and was based on two criteria: the inter-rater reliability and acceptability. The assessment of the inter-rater reliability was based on intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) calculations. Each hospital prospectively enrolled the 10 first patients aged 65 or older presenting with at least one ME. Seven blocks of 10 patients were formed. After randomization, each block was rated by practitioners from 3 hospitals. The assessment of the acceptability was based on a satisfaction questionnaire. A clinical algorithm was developed. The inter-rater reliability of the method was validated by the overall agreement of the 7 hospitals ratings. The agreement was at least substantial (ICC>0.60) and in most of cases almost perfect (ICC>0.80). The acceptability of the method was judged as satisfactory. This multi-centre project has validated an instrument for assessing the severity of potential harm of ME intercepted by medication reconciliation. This will allow studies to be conducted with large cohorts of patients in order to develop epidemiological databases of ME of potential clinical significance. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier B.V.
    European Journal of Internal Medicine 07/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.ejim.2015.07.014 · 2.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "If those patients can be identified in clinical practice, it will enable better resource allocation, as interventions to prevent medication history errors can be directed towards the relevant groups. Results concerning which risk factors predict such errors in medication histories are currently contradictory [5-7,14-17]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An accurate medication list at hospital admission is essential for the evaluation and further treatment of patients. The objective of this study was to describe the frequency, type and predictors of errors in medication history, and to evaluate the extent to which standard care corrects these errors. A descriptive study was carried out in two medical wards in a Swedish hospital using Lund Integrated Medicines Management (LIMM)-based medication reconciliation. A clinical pharmacist identified each patient's most accurate pre-admission medication list by conducting a medication reconciliation process shortly after admission. This list was then compared with the patient's medication list in the hospital medical records. Addition or withdrawal of a drug or changes to the dose or dosage form in the hospital medication list were considered medication discrepancies. Medication discrepancies for which no clinical reason could be identified (unintentional changes) were considered medication history errors. The final study population comprised 670 of 818 eligible patients. At least one medication history error was identified by pharmacists conducting medication reconciliations for 313 of these patients (47%; 95% CI 43-51%). The most common medication error was an omitted drug, followed by a wrong dose. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that a higher number of drugs at admission (odds ratio [OR] per 1 drug increase = 1.10; 95% CI 1.06-1.14; p < 0.0001) and the patient living in their own home without any care services (OR = 1.58; 95% CI 1.02-2.45; p = 0.042) were predictors for medication history errors at admission. The results further indicated that standard care by non-pharmacist ward staff had partly corrected the errors in affected patients by four days after admission, but a considerable proportion of the errors made in the initial medication history at admission remained undetected by standard care (OR for medication errors detected by pharmacists' medication reconciliation carried out on days 4-11 compared to days 0-1 = 0.52; 95% CI 0.30-0.91; p=0.021). Clinical pharmacists conducting LIMM-based medication reconciliations have a high potential for correcting errors in medication history for all patients. In an older Swedish population, those prescribed many drugs seem to benefit most from admission medication reconciliation.
    BMC Clinical Pharmacology 04/2012; 12(1):9. DOI:10.1186/1472-6904-12-9 · 1.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper reviews articles from 2010 that examined medication mishaps (ie, medication errors and adverse drug events [ADEs]) in the elderly. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for English-language articles published in 2010 using a combination of search terms including medication errors, medication adherence, medication compliance, suboptimal prescribing, monitoring, adverse drug events, adverse drug withdrawal events, therapeutic failures, and aged. A manual search of the reference lists of the identified articles and the authors' article files, book chapters, and recent reviews was conducted to identify additional publications. Five studies of note were selected for annotation and critique. From the literature search, this paper also generated a selected bibliography of manuscripts published in 2010 (excluding those previously published in the American Journal of Geriatric Pharmacotherapy or by one of the authors) that address various types of medication errors and ADEs in the elderly. Three studies focused on types of medication errors. One study examined underuse (due to prescribing) as a type of medication error. This before-and-after study from the Netherlands reported that those who received comprehensive geriatric assessments had a reduction in the rate of undertreatment of chronic conditions by over one third (from 32.9% to 22.3%, P < 0.05). A second study focused on reducing medication errors due to the prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications. This quasi-experimental study found that a computerized provider order entry clinical decision support system decreased the number of potentially inappropriate medications ordered for patients ≥ 65 years of age who were hospitalized (11.56 before to 9.94 orders per day after, P < 0.001). The third medication error study was a cross-sectional phone survey of managed-care elders, which found that more blacks than whites had low antihypertensive medication adherence as per a self-reported measure (18.4% vs 12.3%, respectively; P < 0.001). Moreover, blacks used more complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) than whites for the treatment of hypertension (30.5% vs 24.7%, respectively; P = 0.005). In multivariable analyses stratified by race, blacks who used CAM were more likely than those who did not to have low antihypertensive medication adherence (prevalence rate ratio = 1.56; 95% CI, 1.14-2.15; P = 0.006). The remaining two studies addressed some form of medication-related adverse patient events. A case-control study of Medicare Advantage patients revealed for the first time that the use of skeletal muscle relaxants was associated significantly with an increased fracture risk (adjusted odds ratio = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.15-1.72; P < 0.001). This increased risk was even more pronounced with the concomitant use of benzodiazepines. Finally, a randomized controlled trial across 16 centers in France used a 1-week educational intervention about high-risk medications and ADEs directed at rehabilitation health care teams. Results indicated that the rate of ADEs in the intervention group was lower than that in the usual care group (22% vs 36%, respectively, P = 0.004). Information from these studies may advance health professionals' understanding of medication errors and ADEs and may help guide research and clinical practices in years to come.
    02/2011; 9(1):1-10. DOI:10.1016/j.amjopharm.2011.01.003
Show more