Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen ; 133(19): 2052-6, 2013 Oct 15.
Artículo en Inglés, Noruego | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24129536

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Residents in nursing homes have a heightened risk of developing infections that should be treated with antibiotics. Inappropriate use of antibiotics may generate drug-related problems and increase resistance. In this study, we describe the use of antibiotics in nursing homes on the basis of prevalence surveys and drug sales statistics. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Five nursing homes in Oslo participated in two one-day surveys in 2009. All use of systemic antibiotics was registered. The data collection was undertaken according to a protocol developed by the European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption (ESAC) Network and was part of a European study. The nursing homes' drug sales statistics for systemic antibiotics during 2009, distributed by the number of bed days for each nursing home, were estimated. Information on indications for each antibiotic from the prevalence surveys was collated with sales data to achieve an estimate of how the purchased antibiotics were used. RESULTS: The prevalence surveys showed that more than 8% of the residents received antibiotics. Prophylactic treatment accounted for 33% of the prescriptions. A prevalence of antibiotic use of 10% was estimated from the drug sales statistics. Urinary tract infection was the most frequently registered indication. Pivmecillinam and methenamine were most frequently prescribed and most frequently purchased. Most courses of treatment were prescribed in accordance with the national guidelines for antibiotic use. INTERPRETATION: The results from the drug sales statistics concurred well with the prevalence surveys, and the methods can thus be relevant for purposes of monitoring the use of antibiotics.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Revisión de la Utilización de Medicamentos , Casas de Salud/normas , Amdinocilina Pivoxil/economía , Amdinocilina Pivoxil/uso terapéutico , Antibacterianos/economía , Infecciones Bacterianas/tratamiento farmacológico , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/economía , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/normas , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Metenamina/economía , Metenamina/uso terapéutico , Noruega , Casas de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos
2.
Int J Clin Pharm ; 34(2): 382-8, 2012 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22388601

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Drug-related problems (DRPs) have been found to be associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and health costs. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the inclusion of pharmacists in a rehabilitation team influences the handling of DRPs in the ward and whether an intervention in hospital affects drug use after discharge. SETTING: The rehabilitation ward of a general hospital in Oslo, Norway. METHODS: Patients were randomized into an intervention group (IG) or a usual care group (CG). The IG patients were followed prospectively by a pharmacist, who reviewed the patients' drug therapies using information from their medical records and patient interviews. The pharmacist identified DRPs and suggested solutions during multidisciplinary team meetings. The IG patients received targeted drug counselling from the pharmacist before discharge. The drug therapy in the CG, for the period from study randomization to discharge, was assessed retrospectively by the pharmacist, who identified DRPs and recorded how they were acted upon. Three months after discharge, pharmacists who were blinded to the patient randomization, visited the patients at home and interviewed them about their medication. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Types and frequencies of DRPs in the IG and CG were compared at hospital admission, at discharge, and 3 months after discharge. RESULTS: Of the 77 patients included, 40 belonged to the IG and 37 to the CG. Patient characteristics (IG vs CG) were as follows: age 73.5 versus 76.8 years; female 58 versus 68%; mean number of drugs at admission 8.3 versus 7.8; and mean number of drugs at discharge 8.5 versus 7.7. At admission, 4.4 DRPs per patient were recorded in the IG and 4.2 in the CG. Significantly more DRPs were acted upon and resolved in the IG; at discharge, the IG had 1.2 DRPs per patient and the CG had 4.0 (P < 0.01). At the home visit, a significant difference between the groups was found: 1.63 versus 2.62 DRPs (P = 0.02) for the IG and the CG, respectively. CONCLUSION: Involvement of a pharmacist in drug-therapy management, including participation in multidisciplinary team discussions, markedly improved the identification and resolution of DRPs during a hospital stay. The benefit persisted after discharge.


Asunto(s)
Errores de Medicación/prevención & control , Grupo de Atención al Paciente/organización & administración , Farmacéuticos/organización & administración , Servicio de Farmacia en Hospital/organización & administración , Rehabilitación/organización & administración , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Interacciones Farmacológicas , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos , Femenino , Hospitales Generales , Visita Domiciliaria , Humanos , Comunicación Interdisciplinaria , Masculino , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Conciliación de Medicamentos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Noruega , Admisión del Paciente , Alta del Paciente , Estudios Prospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA