Effect of Medication Reconciliation at Hospital Admission on 30-Day Returns to Hospital: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: According to international recommendations, hospitals should use medication reconciliation to prevent medication errors and improve patient safety. Objective: To assess the impact of medication reconciliation at hospital admission on patient-centered health care outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel group, open-label randomized controlled trial used centralized randomization to the intervention group (ie, individuals with medication reconciliation) or control group (ie, individuals with only standard, physician-acquired medication history). Outcome assessors and data analysts were blinded to group allocation. Participants included 1702 patients aged 85 years or older, with more than 10 medications at hospital admission, or meeting both conditions at 2 regional secondary teaching hospitals in southern Switzerland. Study duration was 14.5 months, from November 1, 2018, to January 15, 2020. Data were analyzed from December 2018 through March 2020. Interventions: Medication reconciliation was performed at hospital admission in 3 steps: (1) the pharmacy assistant obtained the list of the patient's current medications (ie, the best possible medication history [BPMH]); (2) the clinical pharmacist led reconciliation of the BPMH with the list of home medications recorded at hospital admission by the attending physician (according to the hospital standard procedure); and (3) medication discrepancies were communicated to the attending physician, and, when necessary, medications prescribed at admission were adapted. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite postdischarge health care use variable quantified as the proportion of patients with unplanned all-cause hospital visits (including visits to the emergency department and hospital readmissions) within 30 days after discharge from the hospital when medication reconciliation took place. A time-to-event analysis was performed. Results: Among 1702 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 86.0 [79.0-89.0] years; 720 [42.3%] men), 866 patients (50.9%) were allocated to the intervention group and 836 patients (49.1%) to the control group. The primary outcome occurred among 340 participants (39.3%) in the intervention group and 330 participants (39.5%) in the control group (P = .93). In time-to-event analyses at study closeout, unplanned all-cause hospital visits to the emergency department (log-rank P = .08) and unplanned all-cause hospital readmissions (log-rank P = .10) occurred similarly in the intervention and control groups. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that medication reconciliation at hospital admission has no impact on postdischarge health care outcomes among patients aged 85 years or older, with more than 10 medications at hospital admission, or meeting both conditions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03654963.

Prevalence, clinical relevance and predictive factors of medication discrepancies revealed by medication reconciliation at hospital admission: prospective study in a Swiss internal medicine ward.

OBJECTIVE: Medication reconciliation (MedRec) is a relevant safety procedure in medication management at transitions of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of MedRec, including a best possible medication history (BPMH) compared with a standard medication history in patients admitted to an internal medicine ward. DESIGN: Prospective interventional study. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics followed by univariate and multivariate Poisson regression models and a zero-inflated Poisson regression model. SETTING: Internal medicine ward in a secondary care hospital in Southern Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: The first 100 consecutive patients admitted in an internal medicine ward. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Medication discrepancies between the medication list obtained by the physician and that obtained by a pharmacist according to a systematic approach (BPMH) were collected, quantified and assessed by an expert panel that assigned a severity score. The same procedure was applied to discrepancies regarding allergies. Predicting factors for medication discrepancies were identified. RESULTS: The median of medications per patient was 8 after standard medication history and 11 after BPMH. Total admission discrepancies were 524 (5.24 discrepancies per patient) with at least 1 discrepancy per patient. For 47 patients, at least one discrepancy was classified as clinically relevant. Discrepancies were classified as significant and serious in 19% and 2% of cases, respectively. Furthermore, 67% of the discrepancies were detected during the interview conducted by the pharmacist with the patients and/or their caregivers. The number of drugs used and the autonomous management of home therapy were associated with an increased number of clinically relevant discrepancies in a multivariable Poisson regression model. CONCLUSION: Even in an advanced healthcare system, a standardised MedRec process including a BPMH represents an important strategy that may contribute to avoid a notable number of clinically relevant discrepancies and potential adverse drug events.

Combining prescription monitoring, benchmarking, and educational interventions to reduce benzodiazepine prescriptions among internal medicine inpatients; a multicenter before and after study in a network of Swiss Public Hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: Reducing the inappropriate benzodiazepine (BZD) prescriptions represents a challenge for health care systems worldwide. The 'Choosing Wisely' campaign recommends against the use of BZD in the elderly as the first choice for insomnia, agitation, or delirium. We aimed to determine whether a transparent monitoring-benchmarking together with educational interventions, on top of the internal publication of a targeted recommendation, could be effective in curbing BZD prescriptions. METHODS: Multicenter before and after study in a network of five southern-Switzerland teaching hospitals. An intervention based on a transparent continuous monitoring-benchmarking system, called 'Reporting Wisely', able to collect, analyze, and report data on BZD prescriptions and educational interventions focused on themed meetings, audit, and feedback, was implemented. The intervention was limited to the Internal Medicine. The impact of the intervention on new BZD prescriptions and de-prescribing at hospital discharge, was assessed using segmented regression analyses of interrupted time-series and comparing Internal Medicine to Surgery. RESULTS: Between July 1st2014, and June 30th2017, data of 45,597 hospital admissions, from Internal Medicine and Surgery departments were analyzed. Before the intervention (July 1st2014 to December 31st2015), the mean monthly new BZD prescription rate was 7.2%; value dropping to 5.5% (24% relative reduction; p < 0.001) in the intervention phase (January 1st2016 to June 30th2017). At the end of the intervention a 15% relative increase of BZD de-prescribing was also found (p < 0.01). The use of atypical antipsychotic (AAP) and other potentially harmful sedative drugs did not increase. In the surgery department, exposed to the recommendation but not to the intervention, a constant upward trend with a slope of 0.129 new prescriptions per 100 admissions per month (95% CI 0.08-0.17; p < 0.001) was seen. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a dual intervention based on transparent monitoring-benchmarking and multidisciplinary education has proved useful in curbing new BZD prescriptions and in promoting BZD de-prescribing in the hospital setting.

Multifaceted intervention to curb in-hospital over-prescription of proton pump inhibitors: A longitudinal multicenter quasi-experimental before-and-after study.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are indicated for a restricted number of clinical conditions, and their misuse can lead to several adverse effects. Despite that, the proportion of overuse is alarmingly high. OBJECTIVE: To test the efficacy of a multifaceted strategy in order to achieve a significant reduction of new PPI prescriptions at discharge in hospitalized patients. DESIGN: Multicenter longitudinal quasi-experimental before-and-after study conducted from July 1st, 2014 to June 30th, 2017. PARTICIPANTS: 44,973 admissions in a network of 5 public teaching hospitals of the Italian-speaking region of Switzerland. INTERVENTION: Multifaceted strategy consisting in a continuous transparent monitoring-benchmarking and in capillary educational interventions applied in the internal medicine departments. To confirm the causality of the results we monitored the trend of new PPI prescriptions in the, not exposed to the intervention, surgery departments of the same hospital network. MAIN MEASURES: New PPI prescriptions at hospital discharge. KEY RESULTS: Over the 36month study period 44,973 patient files were analyzed. At admission, comparing internal medicine vs. surgery departments, 44.9% vs. 23.3% of patients were already being treated with a PPI. The annual rate of new PPI prescriptions, for internal medicine showed a decreasing trend: 19, 19, 18, 16% in years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, respectively (p<0.001, 2014 vs. 2017; p-for-trend <0.001), while an increasing rate was found in the surgery departments in the same years: 30, 29, 36, 36%, respectively (p<0.001, 2014 vs. 2017; p-for-trend <0.001). The case mix was significantly associated with the probability of new PPI prescriptions in both departments (OR1.35, 95% CI 1.26-1.44 for internal medicine and 1.24, 95% CI 1.19-1.30 for surgery). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a multifaceted intervention significantly reduced the time trend of PPI prescriptions at hospital discharge in internal medicine departments. Further studies are needed to confirm whether the strategy proposed could contribute to optimize the in-hospital drug prescription behavior in other healthcare settings as well.

Hypokalaemia in hospitalised patients.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: Hypokalaemia in inpatients is common, and is associated with morbidity and mortality. Its management is risky and not always effective. We launched an educational programme with the aim of increasing the rate of potassium normalisation during hospital stay, and of reducing unmonitored cases. METHODS: The project consisted of three phases: (I) retrospective analysis on 26 471 patients hospitalised in 2012 in five acute care hospitals of southern Switzerland (Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, EOC) with identification of improvement goals on a sample survey (588 cases of hypokalaemia); (II) revision of internal guidelines, and implementation of educational activities in one of the five hospitals (Ospedale Regionale di Locarno, ODL); (III) follow-up analysis on the 26 726 patients hospitalised in 2014 and second sampling to complete the evaluation of the efficacy of the intervention. RESULTS: Phase I, ODL vs EOC: prevalence of hypokalaemia, 21.7 vs 23.2% (p <0.05); treated 53.1 vs 56.5% (not significant); normalisation 62.4 vs 61.1% (ns); absence of monitoring 18.3 vs 21.1% (p <0.05); time to normalisation 3.0 ± 2.7 vs 2.8 ± 2.4 days (ns); secondary hyperkalaemia 1.1 vs 1.4% (ns). Length of stay hypokalaemic vs normokalaemic 11.2 ± 11.7 vs 6.6 ± 7.9 days (p <0.001); falls 3.5 vs 1.7% (p <0.001), deaths 5.1 vs 3.1% (p <0.001). The severity/performance ratio suggested inefficiency. Phase III, ODL 2012 vs ODL 2014: treated 53.1 vs 75.7% (p <0.001); normalisation 62.4 vs 69.7% (p <0.01); absence of monitoring 20.1 vs 8.7 (p <0.01); time to normalisation 3.1 ± 2.7 vs 2.4 ± 2.6 days (ns); secondary hyperkalaemia 1.1 vs 1.8% (ns). CONCLUSIONS: The management of hypokalaemia is characterised by dysfunctions; it can, however, be ameliorated by the implementation of internal guidelines and targeted educational activities. The length of hospital stay is increased in patients with hypokalaemia, shifting the expected length of hospital stay based on the Swiss Diagnosis Related Group classification.

[Choosing Wisely: from theory to practice]. / "Choosing Wisely": von der Theorie zur Praxis.

"Choosing Wisely" is an innovative approach that the Network of Southern Switzerland Public Hospitals has decided to promote. Five standard diagnostic or therapeutic procedures have been chosen to explore the potential benefit of the "Choosing Wisely" initiative: the prescription of benzodiazepines, proton pump inhibitors or antibiotics on discharge from hospital, exposure to ionising radiation in radiological imaging and the number of blood samples taken during hospitalisation. As a first step we compared these variables in the medical and surgical departments of the four major public hospitals in Ticino. We observed significant and unexpected practical differences between specialties and between the different institutions. These results were presented to all concerned healthcare stakeholders. The next steps are to develop continuous monitoring of these indicators and specific recommendations by involving patients in the consciousness-raising process.