Straight to the point: evaluation of a Point of Care Information (POCI) resource in answering disease-related questions.

Objective: To evaluate the ability of DynaMedex, an evidence-based drug and disease Point of Care Information (POCI) resource, in answering clinical queries using keyword searches. Methods: Real-world disease-related questions compiled from clinicians at an academic medical center, DynaMedex search query data, and medical board review resources were categorized into five clinical categories (complications & prognosis, diagnosis & clinical presentation, epidemiology, prevention & screening/monitoring, and treatment) and six specialties (cardiology, endocrinology, hematology-oncology, infectious disease, internal medicine, and neurology). A total of 265 disease-related questions were evaluated by pharmacist reviewers based on if an answer was found (yes, no), whether the answer was relevant (yes, no), difficulty in finding the answer (easy, not easy), cited best evidence available (yes, no), clinical practice guidelines included (yes, no), and level of detail provided (detailed, limited details). Results: An answer was found for 259/265 questions (98%). Both reviewers found an answer for 241 questions (91%), neither found the answer for 6 questions (2%), and only one reviewer found an answer for 18 questions (7%). Both reviewers found a relevant answer 97% of the time when an answer was found. Of all relevant answers found, 68% were easy to find, 97% cited best quality of evidence available, 72% included clinical guidelines, and 95% were detailed. Recommendations for areas of resource improvement were identified. Conclusions: The resource enabled reviewers to answer most questions easily with the best quality of evidence available, providing detailed answers and clinical guidelines, with a high level of replication of results across users.

The Safety of Inpatient Health Care.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events during hospitalization are a major cause of patient harm, as documented in the 1991 Harvard Medical Practice Study. Patient safety has changed substantially in the decades since that study was conducted, and a more current assessment of harm during hospitalization is warranted. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to assess the frequency, preventability, and severity of patient harm in a random sample of admissions from 11 Massachusetts hospitals during the 2018 calendar year. The occurrence of adverse events was assessed with the use of a trigger method (identification of information in a medical record that was previously shown to be associated with adverse events) and from review of medical records. Trained nurses reviewed records and identified admissions with possible adverse events that were then adjudicated by physicians, who confirmed the presence and characteristics of the adverse events. RESULTS: In a random sample of 2809 admissions, we identified at least one adverse event in 23.6%. Among 978 adverse events, 222 (22.7%) were judged to be preventable and 316 (32.3%) had a severity level of serious (i.e., caused harm that resulted in substantial intervention or prolonged recovery) or higher. A preventable adverse event occurred in 191 (6.8%) of all admissions, and a preventable adverse event with a severity level of serious or higher occurred in 29 (1.0%). There were seven deaths, one of which was deemed to be preventable. Adverse drug events were the most common adverse events (accounting for 39.0% of all events), followed by surgical or other procedural events (30.4%), patient-care events (which were defined as events associated with nursing care, including falls and pressure ulcers) (15.0%), and health care-associated infections (11.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events were identified in nearly one in four admissions, and approximately one fourth of the events were preventable. These findings underscore the importance of patient safety and the need for continuing improvement. (Funded by the Controlled Risk Insurance Company and the Risk Management Foundation of the Harvard Medical Institutions.).

Clinical Utility of Pharmacogenomic Data Collected by a Health-System Biobank to Predict and Prevent Adverse Drug Events.

INTRODUCTION: Medication-related harm represents a significant issue for patient safety and quality of care. One strategy to avoid preventable adverse drug events is to utilize patient-specific factors such as pharmacogenomics (PGx) to individualize therapy. OBJECTIVE: We measured the number of patients enrolled in a health-system biobank with actionable PGx results who received relevant medications and assessed the incidence of adverse drug events (ADEs) that might have been prevented had the PGx results been used to inform prescribing. METHODS: Patients with actionable PGx results in the following four genes with Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines were identified: HLA-A*31:01, HLA-B*15:02, TPMT, and VKORC1. The patients who received interacting medications (carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, thiopurines, or warfarin) were identified, and electronic health records were reviewed to determine the incidence of potentially preventable ADEs. RESULTS: Of 36,424 patients with PGx results, 2327 (6.4%) were HLA-A*31:01 positive; 3543 (9.7%) were HLA-B*15:02 positive; 2893 (7.9%) were TPMT intermediate metabolizers; and 4249 (11.7%) were homozygous for the VKORC1 c.1639 G>A variant. Among patients positive for one of the HLA variants who received carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine (n = 92), four (4.3%) experienced a rash that warranted drug discontinuation. Among the TPMT intermediate metabolizers who received a thiopurine (n = 56), 11 (19.6%) experienced severe myelosuppression that warranted drug discontinuation. Among patients homozygous for the VKORC1 c.1639 G>A variant who received warfarin (n = 379), 85 (22.4%) experienced active bleeding and/or international normalized ratio (INR) > 5 that warranted drug discontinuation or dose reduction. CONCLUSION: Patients with actionable PGx results from a health-system biobank who received relevant medications experienced predictable ADEs. These ADEs may have been prevented if the patients' PGx results were available in the electronic health record with clinical decision support prior to prescribing.

How often do prescribers include indications in drug orders? Analysis of 4 million outpatient prescriptions.

PURPOSE: To examine the extent to which outpatient clinicians currently document drug indications in prescription instructions. METHODS: Free-text sigs were extracted from all outpatient prescriptions generated by the computerized prescriber order entry system of a major academic institution during a 5-year period. Natural language processing was used to identify drug indications. The data set was analyzed to determine the rates at which prescribers included indications. It was stratified by provider specialty, drug class, and specific medications, to determine how often these indications were in prescriptions for as-needed (PRN) versus non-PRN medications. RESULTS: During the study period, 4,356,086 prescriptions were ordered. Indications were included in 322,961 orders (7.41%). From these orders, 249,262 indications (77.18%) were written for PRN orders. Although internal medicine prescribers generated the highest number of medication orders, they included indications in only 6.26% of their prescriptions, whereas orthopedic surgery providers had the highest rate of documenting indications (33.41%). Pain was the most common indication, accounting for 30.35% of all documented indications. The drug class with the highest number of sigs-containing indications was narcotic analgesics. Non-PRN chronic medication prescriptions rarely included the indication. CONCLUSION: Prescribers rarely included drug indications in electronic free-text prescription instructions, and, when they did, it was mostly for PRN uses such as pain.

Screening for Adverse Drug Events: a Randomized Trial of Automated Calls Coupled with Phone-Based Pharmacist Counseling.

BACKGROUND: Medication adverse events are important and common yet are often not identified by clinicians. We evaluated an automated telephone surveillance system coupled with transfer to a live pharmacist to screen potentially drug-related symptoms after newly starting medications for four common primary care conditions: hypertension, diabetes, depression, and insomnia. METHODS: Cluster randomized trial with automated calls to eligible patients at 1 and 4 months after starting target drugs from intervention primary care clinics compared to propensity-matched patients from control clinics. Primary and secondary outcomes were physician documentation of any adverse effects associated with newly prescribed target medication, and whether the medication was discontinued and, if yes, whether the reason for stopping was an adverse effect. RESULTS: Of 4876 eligible intervention clinic patients who were contacted using automated calls, 776 (15.1%) responded and participated in the automated call. Based on positive symptom responses or request to speak to a pharmacist, 320 patients were transferred to the pharmacist and discussed 1021 potentially drug-related symptoms. Of these, 188 (18.5%) were assessed as probably and 479 (47.1%) as possibly related to the medication. Compared to a propensity-matched cohort of control clinic patients, intervention patients were significantly more likely to have adverse effects documented in the medical record by a physician (277 vs. 164 adverse effects, p < 0.0001, and 177 vs. 122 patients discontinued with documented adverse effects, p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Systematic automated telephone outreach monitoring coupled with real-time phone referral to a pharmacist identified a substantial number of previously unidentified potentially drug-related symptoms, many of which were validated as probably or possibly related to the drug by the pharmacist or their physicians. Multiple challenges were encountered using the interactive voice response (IVR) automated calling system, suggesting that other approaches may need to be considered and evaluated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02087293.

Incorporating medication indications into the prescribing process.

PURPOSE: The incorporation of medication indications into the prescribing process to improve patient safety is discussed. SUMMARY: Currently, most prescriptions lack a key piece of information needed for safe medication use: the patient-specific drug indication. Integrating indications could pave the way for safer prescribing in multiple ways, including avoiding look-alike/sound-alike errors, facilitating selection of drugs of choice, aiding in communication among the healthcare team, bolstering patient understanding and adherence, and organizing medication lists to facilitate medication reconciliation. Although strongly supported by pharmacists, multiple prior attempts to encourage prescribers to include the indication on prescriptions have not been successful. We convened 6 expert panels to consult high-level stakeholders on system design considerations and requirements necessary for building and implementing an indications-based computerized prescriber order-entry (CPOE) system. We summarize our findings from the 6 expert stakeholder panels, including rationale, literature findings, potential benefits, and challenges of incorporating indications into the prescribing process. Based on this stakeholder input, design requirements for a new CPOE interface and workflow have been identified. CONCLUSION: The emergence of universal electronic prescribing and content knowledge vendors has laid the groundwork for incorporating indications into the CPOE prescribing process. As medication prescribing moves in the direction of inclusion of the indication, it is imperative to design CPOE systems to efficiently and effectively incorporate indications into prescriber workflows and optimize ways this can best be accomplished.