Personal Electronic Records of Medications (PERMs) for medication reconciliation at care transitions: a rapid realist review.

BACKGROUND: Medication reconciliation (MedRec), a process to reduce medication error at care transitions, is labour- and resource-intensive and time-consuming. Use of Personal Electronic Records of Medications (PERMs) in health information systems to support MedRec have proven challenging. Relatively little is known about the design, use or implementation of PERMs at care transitions that impacts on MedRec in the 'real world'. To respond to this gap in knowledge we undertook a rapid realist review (RRR). The aim was to develop theories to explain how, why, when, where and for whom PERMs are designed, implemented or used in practice at care transitions that impacts on MedRec. METHODOLOGY: We used realist methodology and undertook the RRR between August 2020 and February 2021. We collaborated with experts in the field to identify key themes. Articles were sourced from four databases (Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL Complete and OpenGrey) to contribute to the theory development. Quality assessment, screening and data extraction using NVivo was completed. Contexts, mechanisms and outcomes configurations were identified and synthesised. The experts considered these theories for relevance and practicality and suggested refinements. RESULTS: Ten provisional theories were identified from 19 articles. Some theories relate to the design (T2 Inclusive design, T3 PERMs complement existing good processes, T7 Interoperability), some relate to the implementation (T5 Tailored training, T9 Positive impact of legislation or governance), some relate to use (T6 Support and on-demand training) and others relate iteratively to all stages of the process (T1 Engage stakeholders, T4 Build trust, T8 Resource investment, T10 Patients as users of PERMs). CONCLUSIONS: This RRR has allowed additional valuable data to be extracted from existing primary research, with minimal resources, that may impact positively on future developments in this area. The theories are interdependent to a greater or lesser extent; several or all of the theories may need to be in play to collectively impact on the design, implementation or use of PERMs for MedRec at care transitions. These theories should now be incorporated into an intervention and evaluated to further test their validity.

Medication details documented on hospital discharge: cross-sectional observational study of factors associated with medication non-reconciliation.

AIMS: Movement into or out of hospital is a vulnerable period for medication safety. Reconciling the medication a patient is using before admission with the medication prescribed on discharge, and documenting any changes (medication reconciliation) is recommended to improve safety. The aims of the study were to investigate the factors contributing to medication reconciliation on discharge, and identify the prevalence of non-reconciliation. METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional, observational survey using consecutive discharges from purposively selected services in two acute public hospitals in Ireland. Medication reconciliation, potential for harm and unplanned re-admission were investigated. RESULTS: Medication non-reconciliation was identified in 50% of 1245 inpatient episodes, involving 16% of 9569 medications. The majority of non-reconciled episodes had potential to result in moderate (63%) or severe (2%) harm. Handwritten rather than computerized discharges (adjusted odds ratio (adjusted OR) 1.60, 95% CI 1.11, 2.99), increasing number of medications (adjusted OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.21, 1.31) or chronic illness (adjusted OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.33, 3.24) were associated with non-reconciliation. Omission of endocrine, central nervous system and nutrition and blood drugs was more likely on discharge, whilst omission on admission and throughout inpatient care, without documentation, was more likely for obstetric, gynaecology and urinary tract (OGU) or respiratory drugs. Documentation in the discharge communication that medication was intentionally stopped during inpatient care was less likely for cardiovascular, musculoskeletal and OGU drugs. Errors involving the dose were most likely for respiratory drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The findings inform strategies to facilitate medication reconciliation on discharge from acute hospital care.

Deciphering patterns of respiratory medication use in Ireland to target interventions appropriately: a focus on COPD.

BACKGROUND: Ireland has the highest rates of overnight hospitalisations for COPD in the OECD, yet lacks estimates of the prevalence of this disease or its pharmacological management. We aimed to estimate the age and sex-specific prevalence of symptomatic COPD and to identify patterns of respiratory medication use to inform interventions to improve pharmacotherapy in this condition. METHODS: We used the national pharmacy claims database, with data on a publically insured cohort in 2016. We restricted to those aged ≥ 45 years with full eligibility for that year and examined the age and sex distribution of respiratory medications, and patterns of medication use in those suggestive of COPD. RESULTS: In this cohort, 23% filled at least one prescription for a respiratory medication; 14% of males and 16% of females received at least one dispensing of an ICS inhaler. The proportion dispensed a long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist (LAMA) was considerably lower. Of those newly initiated on a LAMA, 24% did not receive another within 60 days of the last covered day. The prevalence of medication use suggestive of COPD was 15% in males and 16% in females. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of medication use consistent with the management of symptomatic COPD mirrors international prevalence estimates. Several patterns raise concern: high ICS use in older adults, under use of LAMA therapy and poor persistence of those newly initiated. We recommend the development of an intervention to assist in the implementation of new national prescribing guidelines for the management of COPD.

Pharmacy services at admission and discharge in adult, acute, public hospitals in Ireland.

OBJECTIVES: to describe hospital pharmacy involvement in medication management in Ireland, both generally and at points of transfer of care, and to gain a broad perspective of the hospital pharmacy workforce. METHODS: a survey of all adult, acute, public hospitals with an accident and emergency (A&E) department (n = 36), using a semi-structured telephone interview. KEY FINDINGS: there was a 97% (n = 35) response rate. The majority (n = 25, 71.4%) of hospitals reported delivery of a clinical pharmacy service. On admission, pharmacists were involved in taking or verifying medication histories in a minority (n = 15, 42.9%) of hospitals, while few (n = 6,17.1%) deployed staff to the A&E/acute medical admissions unit. On discharge, the majority (n = 30,85.7%) did not supply any take-out medication, a minority (n =5,14.3%) checked the discharge prescription, 51.4% (n = 18) counselled patients, 42.9% (n = 15) provided medication compliance charts and one hospital (2.9%) communicated with the patient's community pharmacy. The number of staff employed in the pharmacy department in each hospital was not proportionate to the number of inpatient beds, nor the volume of admissions from A&E. There were differences identified in service delivery between hospitals of different type: urban hospitals with a high volume of admissions from A&E were more likely to deliver clinical pharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: the frequency and consistency of delivering pharmacy services to facilitate medication reconciliation at admission and discharge could be improved. Workforce constraints may inhibit service expansion. Development of national standards of practice may help to eliminate variation between hospitals and support service development.

Overcoming resistance to single-agent therapy for oncogenic BRAF gene fusions via combinatorial targeting of MAPK and PI3K/mTOR signaling pathways.

Pediatric low-grade gliomas (PLGGs) are frequently associated with activating BRAF gene fusions, such as KIAA1549-BRAF, that aberrantly drive the mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway. Although RAF inhibitors (RAFi) have been proven effective in BRAF-V600E mutant tumors, we have previously shown how the KIAA1549-BRAF fusion can be paradoxically activated by RAFi. While newer classes of RAFi, such as PLX8394, have now been shown to inhibit MAPK activation by KIAA1549-BRAF, we sought to identify alternative MAPK pathway targeting strategies using clinically relevant MEK inhibitors (MEKi), along with potential escape mechanisms of acquired resistance to single-agent MAPK pathway therapies. We demonstrate effectiveness of multiple MEKi against diverse BRAF-fusions with novel N-terminal partners, with trametinib being the most potent. However, resistance to MEKi or PLX8394 develops via increased RTK expression causing activation of PI3K/mTOR pathway in BRAF-fusion expressing resistant clones. To circumvent acquired resistance, we show potency of combinatorial targeting with trametinib and everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor (mTORi) against multiple BRAF-fusions. While single-agent mTORi and MEKi PLGG clinical trials are underway, our study provides preclinical rationales for using MEKi and mTORi combinatorial therapy to stave off or prevent emergent drug-resistance in BRAF-fusion driven PLGGs.

Exploring discharge prescribing errors and their propagation post-discharge: an observational study.

Background Discharge prescribing error is common. Little is known about whether it persists post-discharge. Objective To explore the relationship between discharge prescribing error and post-discharge medication error. Setting This was a prospective observational study (March-May 2013) at an adult academic hospital in Ireland. Method Patients using three or more chronic medications pre-admission, with a clinical pharmacist documented gold-standard pre-admission medication list, having a chronic medication stopped or started in hospital and discharged to home were included. Within 10-14 days after discharge a gold standard discharge medication was prepared and compared to the discharge prescription to identify differences. Patients were telephoned to identify actual medication use. Community pharmacists, general practitioners and hospital prescribers were contacted to corroborate actual and intended medication use. Post-discharge medication errors were identified and the relationship to discharge prescribing error was explored. Main outcome measured Incidence, type, and potential severity of post-discharge medication error, and the relationship to discharge prescribing. Results Some 36 (43 %) of 83 patients experienced post-discharge medication error(s), for whom the majority (n = 31, 86 %) were at risk of moderate harm. Most (58 of 66) errors were discharge prescribing errors that persisted post-discharge. Unintentional prescription of an intentionally stopped medication; error in the dose, frequency or formulation and unintentional omission of active medication are the error types most likely to persist after discharge. Conclusion There is a need to implement discharge medication reconciliation to support medication optimisation post-hospitalisation.

Impact of the Collaborative Pharmaceutical Care at Tallaght Hospital (PACT) model on medication appropriateness of older patients.

OBJECTIVES: A high prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) has been identified in older patients in Ireland. The impact of the Collaborative Pharmaceutical Care at Tallaght Hospital (PACT) model on the medication appropriateness of acute hospitalised older patients during admission and at discharge is reported. METHODS: Uncontrolled before-after study. The study population for this study was medical patients aged ≥65 years, using ≥3 regular medicines at admission, taken from a previous before-after study. Standard care involved clinical pharmacists being ward-based, contributing to medication history taking and prescription review, but not involved at discharge. The innovative PACT model involved clinical pharmacists being physician team-based, leading admission and discharge medication reconciliation and undertaking prescription review, with authority to change the prescription during admission or at discharge. The primary outcome was the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) score applied pre-admission, during admission and at discharge. RESULTS: Some 108 patients were included (48 PACT, 60 standard). PACT significantly improved the MAI score from pre-admission to admission (mean difference 2.4, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.9, p<0.005), and from pre-admission to discharge (mean difference 4.0, 95 CI 1.7 to 6.4, p<0.005). PACT resulted in significantly fewer drugs with one or more inappropriate rating at discharge (PACT 15.0%, standard 30.5%, p<0.001). The MAI criteria responsible for most inappropriate ratings were 'correct directions' (4.8% PACT, 17.3% standard), expense (5.3% PACT, 5.7% standard) and dosage (0.6% PACT, 4.0% standard). PACT suggestions to optimise medication use were accepted more frequently, and earlier in the hospital episode, than standard care (96.7% PACT, 69.3% standard, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative pharmaceutical care between physicians and pharmacists from admission to discharge, with authority for pharmacists to amend the prescription, improves medication appropriateness in older hospitalised Irish patients.

Collaborative pharmaceutical care in an Irish hospital: uncontrolled before-after study.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the benefits of the Collaborative Pharmaceutical Care in Tallaght Hospital (PACT) service versus standard ward-based clinical pharmacy in adult inpatients receiving acute medical care, particularly on prevalence of medication error and quality of prescribing. METHODS: Uncontrolled before-after study, undertaken in consecutive adult medical inpatients admitted and discharged alive, using at least three medications. Standard care involved clinical pharmacists being ward-based, contributing to medication history taking and prescription review, but not involved at discharge. The innovative PACT intervention involved clinical pharmacists being team-based, leading admission and discharge medication reconciliation and undertaking prescription review. Primary outcome measures were prevalence per patient of medication error and potentially severe error. Secondary measures included quality of prescribing using the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) in patients aged ≥65 years. FINDINGS: Some 233 patients (112 PACT, 121 standard) were included. PACT decreased the prevalence of any medication error at discharge (adjusted OR 0.07 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.15)); number needed to treat (NNT) 3 (95% CI 2 to 3) and no PACT patient experienced a potentially severe error (NNT 20, 95% CI 10 to 142). In patients aged ≥65 years (n=108), PACT improved the MAI score from preadmission to discharge (Mann-Whitney U p<0.05; PACT median -1, IQR -3.75 to 0; standard care median +1, IQR -1 to +6). CONCLUSIONS: PACT, a collaborative model of pharmaceutical care involving medication reconciliation and review, delivered by clinical pharmacists and physicians, at admission, during inpatient care and at discharge was protective against potentially severe medication errors in acute medical patients and improved the quality of prescribing in older patients.

Using Six Sigma to improve once daily gentamicin dosing and therapeutic drug monitoring performance.

BACKGROUND: Safe, effective therapy with the antimicrobial gentamicin requires good practice in dose selection and monitoring of serum levels. Suboptimal therapy occurs with breakdown in the process of drug dosing, serum blood sampling, laboratory processing and level interpretation. Unintentional underdosing may result. This improvement effort aimed to optimise this process in an academic teaching hospital using Six Sigma process improvement methodology. METHODS: A multidisciplinary project team was formed. Process measures considered critical to quality were defined, and baseline practice was examined through process mapping and audit. Root cause analysis informed improvement measures. These included a new dosing and monitoring schedule, and standardised assay sampling and drug administration timing which maximised local capabilities. Three iterations of the improvement cycle were conducted over a 24-month period. RESULTS: The attainment of serum level sampling in the required time window improved by 85% (p≤0.0001). A 66% improvement in accuracy of dosing was observed (p≤0.0001). Unnecessary dose omission while awaiting level results and inadvertent disruption to therapy due to dosing and monitoring process breakdown were eliminated. Average daily dose administered increased from 3.39 mg/kg to 4.78 mg/kg/day. CONCLUSIONS: Using Six Sigma methodology enhanced gentamicin usage process performance. Local process related factors may adversely affect adherence to practice guidelines for gentamicin, a drug which is complex to use. It is vital to adapt dosing guidance and monitoring requirements so that they are capable of being implemented in the clinical environment as a matter of routine. Improvement may be achieved through a structured localised approach with multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement.