Intervention of pharmacist included in multidisciplinary team to reduce adverse drug event: a qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Preventable harm in healthcare is a growing public health challenge. In addition to the economic costs of safety failures, adverse drug events (ADE) may lead to complication or even death. Multidisciplinary care team involving a pharmacist appears to be an adequate response to prevention of adverse drug event. This qualitative systematic review aims to identify and describe multidisciplinary planned team-based care involving at least one pharmacist to limit or prevent adverse drug events in the adult patients. METHODS: To determine the type of interprofessional collaboration to prevent adverse drug event in which a pharmacist was involved, we conducted a qualitative systematic review of the literature of randomized controlled trials. Two independent reviewers screened trials in three databases: Medline, Web of Science, ScienceDirect. Prospective studies of at least three different health professionals' interventions, one of whom was a pharmacist in the last five years were included. Two reviewers performed data extraction and quality appraisal independently. We used TIDieR checklist to appraise articles quality. RESULTS: In total 803 citations were retrieved, 34 were analysed and 16 full-text articles were reviewed. Only 3 studies published an implementation evaluation. More than half of the interventions (62%) targeted elderly patients including 6 whom lived in nursing homes. Studies outcomes were heterogeneous, and we did not perform a statistical analysis of the impact of these interventions. Most teams are composed of a physician/pharmacist/nurse trio (94%; 100%; 88%). Half of the teams were composed of the primary care physician. Other professionals were included such as physical therapists (25%), social worker (19%), occupational therapists (12%), and community health educator (6%). Multidisciplinary medication review was the most common intervention and was generally structured in four steps: data collection and baseline assessment, appraisal report by health professionals, a multidisciplinary medication review meeting and a patient follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The most common multidisciplinary intervention to prevent ADE in the adult population is the multidisciplinary drug review meeting at least the physician/pharmacist/nurse trio. Interventions target mostly elderly people in nursing homes, although complex chronic patients could benefit from this type of assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration: CRD42022334685.

Impact of a preoperative pharmaceutical consultation in scheduled orthopedic surgery on admission: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors have a high prevalence in surgery and management of home medication is strongly involved in these errors. In scheduled surgery, the preoperative consultation is a privileged time to inform the patient about the management of her/his home medication before admission. This study assessed the impact of a pre-anesthesia best possible medication history (PA-BPMH) on admission. The PA-BPMH was performed by a clinical pharmacist prior to the anesthesia consultation for anesthesiologists to prescribe admission medical orders for scheduled orthopedic surgery patients. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study which was carried out in an orthopedic surgery department. All patients over 18 years old with an elective orthopedic surgery were eligible except ambulatory surgery patients. The pharmacist registered the PA-BPMH into the software making it available for anesthesiologists for the pre-admission medication order. Finally, a medication reconciliation was performed at admission. The main outcome was the percentage of patients with at least one unintended medication discrepancy (UMD) at admission. The nature, potential clinical impact and acceptance rate of each UMD detected were assessed. Also, the PA-BPMH process was described and patients and anesthesiologists satisfaction was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 455 patients had a pharmaceutical consultation. Medication reconciliation was performed at admission for 360 patients. Overall, at least one UMD was observed in 13.0% of patients (n = 47). A total of 63 UMD were detected. The most common type of UMD was omission (25.4%) and incorrect drug (23.8%).Two UMD (3.2%) were evaluated as life threatening. All the UMD detected were corrected on the admission medication order. CONCLUSION: A preoperative pharmacist-anesthesiologist teamwork seems to improve the safety of perioperative management of home medication for scheduled orthopedic surgery patients. This process needs a randomized clinical trial across a wider range of surgeries before its implementation.

Impact of Quality Bundle Enforcement by a Critical Care Pharmacist on Patient Outcome and Costs.

OBJECTIVES: Surgical and medical ICU patients are at high risk of mortality and provide a significant cost to the healthcare system. The aim of this study is to describe the effect of pharmacist-led interventions on drug therapy and clinical strategies on ICU patient outcome and hospital costs. DESIGN: Before and after study in two French ICUs (16 and 10 beds). PATIENTS: ICU patients. INTERVENTION: From January 1, 2013, to June 30, 2015, a pharmacist observation period was compared with an intervention period in which a critical care pharmacist provided recommendations to clinicians regarding sedative drugs and doses, choice of mechanical ventilation mode and related settings, antimicrobial de-escalation, and central venous and urinary catheters removal. Differences in ICU and hospital length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality rate, and hospital costs per patient were quantified between groups with patients matched for severity of illness (Simplified Acute Physiology Score II) at admission. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: From the 1,519 and 1,268 admitted patients during the observation and intervention periods, respectively, 1,164 patients were evaluable in both groups after matching for Simplified Acute Physiology Score II score. The intervention period was associated with mean (95% CI) reductions in patient hospital length of stay (3.7 d [5.2-2.3 d]; p < 0.001), ICU length of stay (1.4 d [2.3-0.5 d]; p < 0.005), duration of mechanical ventilation (1.2 d [2.1-0.3 d]; p < 0.01), and hospital costs per stay (2,560 euros [3,728-1,392 euros]; p < 0.001). The overall cost savings were 10,840 euros (10,727-10,952 euros) per month, mostly due to reduced consumption of sedatives and antimicrobials. No impact on mortality rate was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Critical care pharmacist-led interventions were associated with decreases in ICU and hospital length of stays and ICU drug costs.

Potentially Harmful Excipients: State of the Art for Oral Liquid Forms Used in Neonatology and Pediatrics Units.

The pediatric population exhibits an important age-dependent heterogeneity in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics parameters, resulting in differences in drug efficacy and toxicity compared to the adult population, particularly for neonates. Toxicity and efficacy divergences have been studied for active molecules, but the impact on the pharmacological parameters of excipients remains less well known. To fill this lack of knowledge, several initiatives have been started to gather information on the specific toxicity of excipients, such as the KIDS list or the STEP database. In order to contribute to this much-needed action, in this work, a compilation of the 219 formulations of oral liquid forms prescribed in pediatrics and neonatology units was established based on the summary of product characteristics. Then, for excipients found in more than 10% of the analyzed formulations, a review of their toxicity data was carried out using the STEP database. Finally, for a selection of 10 frequently used liquid forms, the amounts of excipients administered daily were calculated based on the recommended posology in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) and compared with the recommended daily limits proposed by the European Medicine Agency. Pediatrics-adapted formulations are still rare, and it is not always possible to find safe alternatives to drugs containing excipients of interest.

Evaluating the costs of adverse drug events in hospitalized patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug events (ADEs) are not only a safety and quality of care issue for patients, but also an economic issue with significant costs. Because they often occur during hospital stays, it is necessary to accurately quantify the costs of ADEs. This review aimed to investigate the methods to calculate these costs, and to characterize their nature. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify methods used to assess the cost of ADEs on Medline, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Original articles published from 2017 to 2022 in English and French were included. Economic evaluations were included if they concerned inpatients. RESULTS: From 127 studies screened, 20 studies were analyzed. There was a high heterogeneity in nature of costs, methods used, values obtained, and time horizon chosen. A small number of studies considered non-medical (10%), indirect (20%) and opportunity costs (5%). Ten different methods for assessing the cost of ADEs have been reported and nine studies did not explain how they obtained their values. CONCLUSIONS: There is no consensus in the literature on how to assess the costs of ADEs, due to the heterogeneity of contexts and the choice of different economic perspectives. Our study adds a well-deserved overview of the existing literature that can be a solid lead for future studies and method implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration CRD42023413071.

Clinical impact of pharmaceutical consultations in patients treated for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (BPCObs study).

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an irreversible chronic respiratory disease which outcome depends on medication adherence. Pharmacists may increase this adherence by advising patients on inhaler devices proper use. This paper presents the protocol for a randomized controlled trial, which assesses impact of pharmaceutical consultations on COPD exacerbations, medical care, adherence to inhaler devices and quality of life. Methods: This trial will include 226 COPD patients treated with inhaler devices: 94 in a control group, 66 receiving a pharmaceutical consultation at hospital and 66 receiving up to 12 pharmaceutical consultations corresponding to dispensing at their community pharmacy. The aim of these interventions is to inform patients about COPD medication, train them in the use of inhaler devices and improve adherence. Patients included by hospital pharmacist will be randomly assigned to the control and hospital experimental groups. Community pharmacists (CP) will include patients in the experimental community group. CPs will follow-up all study patients for 12 months. Primary outcome is the mean number of COPD exacerbations. Secondary outcomes include number of medical consultations, emergency visits and hospitalizations, patients' adherence devices and quality of life. Discussion: This is the first French trial which assesses both hospital and community pharmaceutical interventions on COPD patients. Study limitations include recruitment and CP adherence to follow-up. Indeed, the success of this trial depends on the willingness of CPs to collect the data. This work is the first step towards building a network of CPs trained for clinical research. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03704545. Registered on October 12th, 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03704545?cond=COPD&cntry=FR&city=nimes&draw=2&rank=1.

Outcomes of Beta-Lactam Allergic and Non-Beta-Lactam Allergic Patients with Intra-Abdominal Infection: A Case-Control Study.

Background: In the case of intra-abdominal infections (IAI) in beta-lactam (BL) allergic patients, empiric antimicrobial therapy without BL is recommended; however, data regarding the outcome with alternative regimens are scarce. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of BL allergic (BLA) patients with IAI to those who were non-BLA (NBLA). Method: We conducted a case−control study in a French teaching hospital, between 1 January 2016 and 31 August 2021. BLA patients with IAI treated with fluoroquinolone or aztreonam and metronidazole were matched with controls treated with BL, on age, sex, disease severity, IAI localization, and healthcare-associated infection (HAI) status. We compared rates of therapeutic failures, adverse events, and HAI, and then assessed factors associated with therapeutic failure using a logistic regression model. Results: The therapeutic failure rate was 14% (p > 0.99) in both groups of 43 patients, and there was no significant difference in the adverse events rate (p > 0.99) and HAI rate (p = 0.154). Factors independently associated with therapeutic failure were higher BMI (OR 1.16; 95%CI [1.00−1.36]; p = 0.041), longer hospital length of stay (OR 1,20; 95%CI [1.08−1.41]; p = 0.006), and inadequate empiric antimicrobial therapy (OR 11.71; 95%CI [1.43−132.46]; p = 0.025). Conclusion: The outcomes of BLA patients with IAI treated without BL were the same as those for NBLA patients treated with BL.

Pharmaceutical Analysis of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Requests Increases the Use of Single-Lumen Catheters: A Prospective Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVES: Several studies have suggested a strong relationship between the number of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) lumens and the risk of complications. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of the intervention of a clinical pharmacist (CP) on the number of lumens of PICC inserted and assess PICC-related complications. METHOD: This prospective monocentric study included all consecutive patients from 5 different units who underwent PICC insertions from September 2017 to March 2018. In the intervention group, the CP validated the pertinence of each PICC request according to the patients' records, choice of device (single or double lumen), and incompatibilities between treatments. The control group consisted of patients who underwent PICC insertions without a CP intervention. Complications were prospectively recorded up to PICC removal. Multivariate analyses adjusted for sex, age, and PICC line duration were performed. RESULTS: In the intervention group, 207 PICCs were inserted, 81.2% (n = 168) were single-lumen devices and 18.8% (n = 39) were double-lumen devices. In the control group (n = 77), the use of single-lumen PICCs was significantly lower (n = 48, 62.3%; P = 0.002). After intervention, the overall complication incidence rate decreased from 4.42 to 3.23 per 1000 catheter days ( P = 0.082). Considering the overall population, 216 single-lumen PICCs were inserted with significantly fewer complications than double-lumens (respectively n = 16, 16/216 = 7.4%, versus n = 15, 15/68 = 22.1%, P = 0.002). The adjusted odds ratio of double-lumen PICC was 3.83 (95% confidence interval, 1.46-10.07; P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed the intervention of a CP in the PICC insertion process could increase the use of single-lumen PICCs and tended to reduce associated complications.

A new clinical approach to improve the appropriate use of peripherally inserted central catheters: a prospective study.

OBJECTIVES: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are central venous catheters commonly used for administration of chemotherapy, prolonged antibiotic treatment, or parenteral nutrition. It is advisable to use the PICC with the fewest lumens and the smallest possible diameter to reduce major complications. A pharmaceutical analysis and validation of PICC requests was designed to improve efficiency and patient safety. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of pharmaceutical interventions (PIs) by the clinical pharmacist in the PICC process. METHODS: A prospective pilot study was conducted in a French university hospital. Four categories of PIs were defined according to the different stages of the PICC insertion process: before insertion to validate with the physician the relevance of the request and the choice of PICC model (PI applicant); during insertion (PI installer); during usage by nurses for analysis of drug incompatibilities (PI user); and at hospital discharge for reassessment of the device maintenance (PI reassessment). Each PI applicant was designated a potential harm from 1 to 4, with a cut-off of 2 representing harm for the patient. RESULTS: Over 6 months, 277 requests were analysed and 297 PIs were completed (109 applicants, 98 installers, 84 users, and 6 PIs for reassessment). The acceptance rate by the physicians was 93.6%. 52% of the PI applicants had a potential harm of 2 or more. 5% of PICC requests were refused by the pharmacist due to an inappropriate choice of device. A total of 207 (74.7%) of the requests analysed by the clinical pharmacist led to insertion. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a clinical pharmacy activity applied to PICC requests analysis and validation leads to improved patient care by securing the PICC circuit. This analysis demonstrates the beneficial role of the clinical pharmacist in PIs associated with medical devices.

Impact of a pharmacist and geriatrician medication review on drug-related problems in older outpatients with cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Older patients with cancer have increased risk for comorbidity, polypharmacy (PP) and drug related problems (DRP). The aim of this study was to assess the effect of a clinical pharmacist and geriatrician medication review (MR) among older outpatients with cancer to optimize management of comorbidities during comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a single-center prospective study among older outpatients with cancer (≥75 years). A pharmacist consultation was added into CGA process. The clinical pharmacist detected and assessed PP and DRP such as potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) according to the Laroche French list and STOPP criteria, START criteria and adverse drug events (ADE) risk. After a multidisciplinary MR, the proposals for prescription modification were sent to general practitioners (GPs). RESULTS: Fifty-one consenting patients were recruited between May 2016 and March 2017, with a median age of 83 years. Prevalence of PP was 80.4%. 165 DRP were detected among 86% patients (median number of DRP = 3.0): 19.4% were misuse, 43.6% underuse, and 37.0% overuse. A significant decrease was observed in prevalence of PIM use (Laroche: 31.4% versus 5.9%, p = 0.002), START criteria (66.7% to 5.9%; P < 0.001) and ADE score (4.0 before MR versus 2.0 after, p = 0.023). A trend was observed for a lower number of medications (10.0 versus 8.0, p = 0.092) and on STOPP criteria prevalence (56.9% versus 31.4%, p = 0.12). CONCLUSION: A clinical pharmacist and a geriatrician MR is effective to detect and reduce DRP in older outpatients with cancer.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Led to a Small Increase in Changed Mentality Regarding Infection Risk without Any Change in Willingness to Be Vaccinated in Chronic Diseases Patients.

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' perceptions regarding infection risk and vaccination in subjects suffering from chronic diseases. A prospective observational multicentric study conducted from December 2020 to April 2021 in three French University Hospitals. Patients with chronic diseases were proposed to complete a questionnaire regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infectious risk knowledge and vaccination. A total of 1151 patients were included and analyzed (62% of which were people with diabetes). The COVID-19 pandemic increased awareness of infectious risks by 19.3%, significantly more in people with diabetes (23.2%, from 54.4% to 67.0%, p < 0.01) when compared to the other high-risk patients (12.5%, from 50.5% to 56.8%, p = 0.06). Respectively, 30.6% and 16.5% of patients not up-to-date for pneumococcal and flu vaccines reported wanting to update their vaccination due to the COVID-19 pandemic. By contrast, the proportion of patients against vaccines increased during the COVID-19 pandemic (6.0% vs. 9.5%, p < 0.01). The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a small increase in awareness regarding the risks of infection in patients with chronic diseases, including people with diabetes, but without any change in willingness to be vaccinated. This underlines the urgent need to sensibilize people with diabetes to infection risk and the importance of vaccination.

Health economic evaluation of a clinical pharmacist's intervention on the appropriate use of devices and cost savings: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Good management of disposable and reusable supplies may improve surgical efficiency in the operating room (OR) and also corresponds to the best eco-responsible approach. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of a clinical pharmacist's intervention in the OR on the non-compliant use of medical devices. We also assessed the economic impact of the pharmaceutical intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a monocentric prospective study in the OR of a University hospital over one year. Three surgical specialties: urologic, digestive and gynecologic were audited after a preparatory phase to optimize usage of medical devices used for surgeries. The supply costs concerning the three specialties were compared before and after the pharmacist intervention. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty surgical procedures were audited in digestive (33.3%, n = 50), gynecologic (32%, n = 48) and urologic (34.7%, n = 52) surgeries. With the pharmacist in OR, 51 procedures (34% CI95%[26.4%; 41.6%]) with a non-compliance concerning at least one medical device were found compared to the 50% rate without the pharmacist reported previously (P < .0001). Eighteen percent of surgical procedures had at least one circulator retrieval for the reason "incomplete case cart despite device listed on the case cart list" versus 29.1% before pharmacist intervention (P = .0028). A €33 014 saving associated with the presence of the pharmacist in OR was observed. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective interventional study showed that the intervention of a pharmacist specialized in the medical device field could significantly reduce non-compliances in medical device use and reduce costs in OR.

Impact of pharmacist-led multidisciplinary medication review on the safety and medication cost of the elderly people living in a nursing home: a before-after study.

Objectives: Adverse drug events (ADE) are a common cause of morbidity and mortality in elderly patients. In this study, we assessed the impact of multidisciplinary medication review (MMR) for nursing home residents on patient safety and costs incurred by the hospital and the national health service. Methods: Medical files of residents were retrospectively assessed for medications prescribed in the previous six months. A pharmacist reviewed the prescriptions and suggested modifications to the patient's medical team. Patients were followed for six months. Trivalle's ADE geriatric risk score was calculated before and after MMR, as were number of potentially inappropriate medications, and economic impact from the perspective of the health care system and the nursing home. Results: Forty-nine patients were recruited. ADE score dropped one risk level (median score of 4 before versus 1 after, p < 0.0001). The number of patients taking at least one potentially inappropriate medication decreased from 30.6% before to 6.1% after MMR (p = 0.005). A mean saving of €232 per patient was made from the nursing home perspective following MMR (p = 0.008). Conclusion: The MMR reduced the iatrogenic drug risk for elderly residents and costs from the nursing home perspective, particularly drug expenditure.

Impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care on in-patients' medication safety: study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial (MEDREV study).

BACKGROUND: Clinical pharmaceutical care has long played an important role in the improvement of healthcare safety. Pharmaceutical care is a collaborative care approach, implicating all the actors of the medication circuit in order to prevent and correct drug-related problems that can lead to adverse drug events. The collaborative pharmaceutical care performed during patients' hospitalization requires two mutually reinforcing activities: medication reconciliation and medication review. Until now, the impact of the association of these two activities has not been clearly studied. METHODS: This is a multicentric stepped wedge randomized study involving six care units from six French University Hospitals (each unit corresponding to a cluster) over seven consecutive 14-day periods. Each hospital unit will start with a control period and switch to an experimental period after a randomized number of 14-day periods. Patients aged at least 65 years hospitalized in one of the participating care units and having given their consent to be called for a 30-day and 90-day follow-up can be enrolled. For each 14-day period, 15 patients will be recruited in each care unit to obtain a total of 630 patients enrolled in all centers. Patients with a hospital stay of more than 21 days will be excluded. During the control period, there will be no clinical pharmacist in the care unit, whereas during the experimental period a clinical pharmacist will perform medication reconciliation and review with the healthcare team. The primary outcome will assess the impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care on preventable medication error rate. The secondary outcomes will evaluate the clinical impact of the strategy, the acceptance rate of pharmaceutical interventions, the induced and avoided costs of the strategy (cost-consequence analysis), and the healthcare team's satisfaction. DISCUSSION: This study will assess the impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care associating medication reconciliation and review at patient admission to hospital in terms of preventable medication error rate and costs. This activity will prevent and correct medication errors arising earlier in the hospitalization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02598115 . Registered on 4 November 2015.

Improving medication safety: Development and impact of a multivariate model-based strategy to target high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Preventive strategies to reduce clinically significant medication errors (MEs), such as medication review, are often limited by human resources. Identifying high-risk patients to allow for appropriate resource allocation is of the utmost importance. To this end, we developed a predictive model to identify high-risk patients and assessed its impact on clinical decision-making. METHODS: From March 1st to April 31st 2014, we conducted a prospective cohort study on adult inpatients of a 1,644-bed University Hospital Centre. After a clinical evaluation of identified MEs, we fitted and internally validated a multivariate logistic model predicting their occurrence. Through 5,000 simulated randomized controlled trials, we compared two clinical decision pathways for intervention: one supported by our model and one based on the criterion of age. RESULTS: Among 1,408 patients, 365 (25.9%) experienced at least one clinically significant ME. Eleven variables were identified using multivariable logistic regression and used to build a predictive model which demonstrated fair performance (c-statistic: 0.72). Major predictors were age and number of prescribed drugs. When compared with a decision to treat based on the criterion of age, our model enhanced the interception of potential adverse drug events by 17.5%, with a number needed to treat of 6 patients. CONCLUSION: We developed and tested a model predicting the occurrence of clinically significant MEs. Preliminary results suggest that its implementation into clinical practice could be used to focus interventions on high-risk patients. This must be confirmed on an independent set of patients and evaluated through a real clinical impact study.

Identifying Life-Threatening Admissions for Drug Dependence or Abuse (ILIADDA): Derivation and Validation of a Model.

Given that drug abuse and dependence are common reasons for hospitalization, we aimed to derive and validate a model allowing early identification of life-threatening hospital admissions for drug dependence or abuse. Using the French National Hospital Discharge Data Base, we extracted 66,101 acute inpatient stays for substance abuse, dependence, mental disorders or poisoning associated with medicines or illicit drugs intake, recorded between January 1st, 2009 and December 31st, 2014. We split our study cohort at the center level to create a derivation cohort and a validation cohort. We developed a multivariate logistic model including patient's age, sex, entrance mode and diagnosis as predictors of a composite primary outcome of in-hospital death or ICU admission. A total of 2,747 (4.2%) patients died or were admitted to ICU. The risk of death or ICU admission was mainly associated with the consumption of opioids, followed by cocaine and other narcotics. Particularly, methadone poisoning was associated with a substantial risk (OR: 35.70, 95% CI [26.94-47.32], P < 0.001). In the validation cohort, our model achieved good predictive properties in terms of calibration and discrimination (c-statistic: 0.847). This allows an accurate identification of life-threatening admissions in drug users to support an early and appropriate management.

Compatibility of ondansetron hydrochloride and methylprednisolone sodium succinate in multilayer polyolefin containers.

PURPOSE: The compatibility of ondansetron hydrochloride and methylprednisolone sodium succinate in 5% dextrose injection and 0.9% sodium chloride injection was studied. METHODS: Test solutions of ondansetron hydrochloride 0.16 mg/mL and methylprednisolone sodium succinate 2.4 mg/mL were prepared in triplicate and tested in duplicate. Total volumes of 4 and 2 mL of ondansetron hydrochloride solution and methylprednisolone sodium succinate solution, respectively, were added to 50-mL multilayer polyolefin bags containing 5% dextrose injection or 0.9% sodium chloride injection. Bags were stored for 24 hours at 20-25 degrees C and for 48 hours at 4-8 degrees C. Chemical compatibility was measured with high-performance liquid chromatography, and physical compatibility was determined visually. RESULTS: Ondansetron hydrochloride was stable for up to 24 hours at 20-25 degrees C and up to 48 hours at 4-8 degrees C. Methylprednisolone sodium succinate was stable for up to 48 hours at 4-8 degrees C. When stored at 20-25 degrees C, methylprednisolone sodium succinate was stable for up to 7 hours in 5% dextrose injection and up to 24 hours in 0.9% sodium chloride injection. Compatibility data for solutions containing ondansetron hydrochloride plus methylprednisolone sodium succinate revealed that each drug was stable for up to 24 hours at 20-25 degrees C and up to 48 hours at 4-8 degrees C. CONCLUSION: Ondansetron 0.16 mg/mL (as the hydrochloride) and methylprednisolone 2.4 mg/mL (as the sodium succinate) mixed in 50-mL multilayer polyolefin bags were stable in both 5% dextrose injection and 0.9% sodium chloride injection for up to 24 hours at 20-25 degrees C and up to 48 hours at 4-8 degrees C.

Improving Patient's Primary Medication Adherence: The Value of Pharmaceutical Counseling.

Quality of transitions of care is one of the first concerns in patient safety. Redesigning the discharge process to incorporate clinical pharmacy activities could reduce the incidence of postdischarge adverse events by improving medication adherence. The present study investigated the value of pharmacist counseling sessions on primary medication adherence after hospital discharge.This study was conducted in a 1844-bed hospital in France. It was divided in an observational period and an interventional period of 3 months each. In both periods, ward-based clinical pharmacists performed medication reconciliation and inpatient follow-up. In interventional period, initial counseling and discharge counseling sessions were added to pharmaceutical care. The primary medication adherence was assessed by calling community pharmacists 7 days after patient discharge.We compared the measure of adherence between the patients from the observational period (n = 201) and the interventional period (n = 193). The rate of patients who were adherent increased from 51.0% to 66.7% between both periods (P < 0.01). When discharge counseling was performed (n = 78), this rate rose to 79.7% (P < 0.001). The multivariate regression performed on data from both periods showed that age of at least 78 years old, and 3 or less new medications on discharge order were predictive factors of adherence. New medications ordered at discharge represented 42.0% (n = 1018/2426) of all medications on discharge order. The rate of unfilled new medications decreased from 50.2% in the observational period to 32.5% in the interventional period (P < 10). However, patients included in the observational period were not significantly more often readmitted or visited the emergency department than the patients who experienced discharge counseling during the interventional period (45.3% vs. 46.2%; P = 0.89).This study highlights that discharge counseling sessions are essential to improve outpatients' primary medication adherence. We identified predictive factors of primary nonadherence in order to target the most eligible patients for discharge counseling sessions. Moreover, implementation of discharge counseling could be facilitated by using Health Information Technology to adapt human resources and select patients at risk of nonadherence.

Impact of admission medication reconciliation performed by clinical pharmacists on medication safety.

BACKGROUND: Many activities contribute to reduce drug-related problems. Among them, the medication reconciliation (MR) is used to compare the best possible medication history (BPMH) and the current admission medication order (AMO) to identify and solve unintended medication discrepancies (UMD). This study aims to assess the impact of the implementation of admission MR by clinical pharmacists on UMD. METHOD: This prospective study was carried out in two units of general medicine and infectious and tropical diseases in a 1844-bed French hospital. A retroactive MR performed in an observational period was compared to a proactive MR realized in an interventional period. We used a logistic regression to identify risk factors of UMD. RESULTS: During both periods, 394 patients were enrolled and 2,725 medications were analyzed in the BPMH. Proactive MR reduced the percentage of patients with at least one UMD compared with retroactive process (respectively 2.1% vs. 45.8%, p<0.001). Patients with at least one UMD during both periods were older compared to patients without UMD (79 vs. 72, p<0.005) and had more medications at admission (7 vs. 6, p<0.0001). UMD occur 38 times more often when there is no clinical pharmacist intervention. Among the 226 UMD detected in both periods, 42% would have required monitoring or intervention to preclude harm, and 10% had potential harm to the patient and 2% were life threatening. CONCLUSION: Proactive MR performed by clinical pharmacists is an acute process of detection and correction of UMD, but it requires a lot of human resources.