Medication list assessment in Spanish hospital emergency departments.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors lead to morbidity and mortality among emergency department (ED) patients. An inaccurate medication history is one of the underlying causes of these errors. OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to determine the prevalence of patients with discrepancies between the medical list information contained in the clinical history compiled on admission to the ED and the list of medications patients are actually taking, to characterize the discrepancies found, and to analyze whether certain factors are associated with the risk of discrepancies. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, descriptive, observational, multicenter study with an analytic component in the EDs of 11 hospitals in Spain. We compared pharmacist-obtained medication lists (PML) with ED-obtained medication lists (EDML). Discrepancy was defined as one or more differences (in drug or dosage or route of administration) between the EDML and PML. The endpoints were the proportion of patients with discrepancies in their home medical lists, and the prevalence of certain factors among patients with discrepancies and those without. RESULTS: We detected 1476 discrepancies in 387 patients; no discrepancies were found in 20.7%. The most frequent discrepancies involved incomplete information (44.2%) and omission (41.8%). In the bivariate analysis, age, number of medications, and Charlson comorbidity score were significantly associated with discrepancy. In the multivariate analysis, number of medications and hospital were the variables associated with discrepancy. CONCLUSIONS: The EDML differed from the list of medications patients were actually taking in 79.3% of cases. Incomplete information and omission were the most frequent discrepancies. Age, number of medications, and comorbidities were related to the risk of discrepancies.

Incidence of Lyme Borreliosis in Finland: Exploring Observed Trends Over Time Using Public Surveillance Data, 2015-2020.

Background: Lyme borreliosis (LB) is a tick-borne zoonotic disease endemic in many European countries, including Finland. We describe the incidence, time trends, and geographical distribution of LB in Finland for the period 2015-2020. The data generated can help inform public health policy, including prevention strategies. Methods: We retrieved online-available LB cases and incidence from two Finnish national databases. Microbiologically confirmed LB cases were identified from the National Infectious Disease Register and clinically diagnosed LB cases from the National Register of Primary Health Care Visits (Avohilmo), with the total LB cases equal to the sum from these two sources. Results: A total of 33,185 LB cases were reported for the 2015-2020 period, of which 12,590 (38%) were microbiologically confirmed and 20,595 (62%) were clinically diagnosed. The average annual national incidences for total, microbiologically confirmed, and clinically diagnosed LB were, respectively, 99.6, 38.1, and 61.4 per 100,000 population. The total LB incidence was highest in the south to southwestern coastal areas by the Baltic Sea and in eastern areas, with average annual incidences of 109.0 to 207.3/100,000. The Åland Islands were a hyperendemic region with an average annual incidence of 2473.9/100,000. The highest incidence was among persons aged >60 years, peaking at age 70-74 years. Most cases were reported between May and October, with a peak in July and August. Conclusions: The incidence of LB varied substantially by hospital district, and many regions reached incidences comparable with other high incidence countries, suggesting preventive measures such as vaccines may be an efficient use of resources.

Vaccine safety surveillance in pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries using GAIA case definitions: A feasibility assessment.

BACKGROUND: Global efforts to adequately monitor safety of new vaccines for pregnant women in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are needed. The Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in pregnancy (GAIA) project recently published case definitions based on levels of diagnostic certainty for pregnancy- and neonatal outcomes and maternal vaccination. As a preliminary step to assessing the applicability of these definitions in LMICs, WHO selected sites and conducted a feasibility assessment to evaluate their ability to identify and classify selected outcomes (preterm birth, neonatal death, neonatal invasive bloodstream infection (NI-BSI), stillbirth) and maternal vaccination. METHODS: Candidate sites were initially screened using a questionnaire. For each outcome, eligible sites were asked to retrospectively identify and collect information for three individuals born in 2016. Subsequently, outcomes were classified by level of diagnostic certainty. RESULTS: Fifty-one sites (15 countries) were screened; 32 of them (9 countries) participated in the assessment and identified 315 subjects with the outcomes of interest. Twenty-four sites (8 countries) identified at least one subject per outcome and agreed to continue participating. The majority (80%) of preterm births, neonatal deaths, and NI-BSI subjects, but only 50% of stillbirths, could be assessed for diagnostic certainty. The main reasons for not classifying stillbirths were insufficient information to distinguish between antepartum and intrapartum stillbirth (29%); or that not all data for one subject fit into a single level of diagnostic certainty (35%). Forty-nine percent of mothers were considered vaccinated, 6% not-vaccinated, and vaccination status could not be assessed in 44% of them. DISCUSSION: GAIA case definitions for four neonatal outcomes and maternal vaccination were successfully piloted in 24 sentinel sites across four WHO regions. Our assessment found that modification of the stillbirth definition could help avoid potential misclassification. Vaccine safety monitoring in LMICs will benefit from systematic recording of all vaccinations during pregnancy.