Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Res Social Adm Pharm ; 20(8): 679-688, 2024 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38811260

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Findings on the effectiveness of medication reviews led by community pharmacists (CPs) are often inconclusive. It has been hypothesized that studies are not sufficiently standardized, and thus, it is difficult to draw conclusions. OBJECTIVE(S): To examine differences in the way CP-led medication review studies are set up. This was accomplished by investigating (1) patient selection criteria, (2) components of the medication review interventions, (3) types of outcomes, and (4) measurement instruments used. METHODS: A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials of CP-led medication reviews was carried out in PubMed and Cochrane Library. Information on patient selection, intervention components, and outcome measurements was extracted, and frequencies were analyzed. Where possible, outcomes were mapped to the Core Outcome Set (COS) for medication review studies. Finally, a network analysis was conducted to explore the influence of individual factors on outcome effects. RESULTS: In total, 30 articles (26 studies) were included. Most articles had a drug class-specific or disease-specific patient selection criterion (n = 19). Half of the articles included patients aged ≥60 years (n = 15), and in 40% (n = 12/30) patients taking 4 drugs or more. In 24 of 30 articles, a medication review was comprised with additional interventions, such as distribution of educational material and training or follow-up visits. About 40 different outcomes were extracted. Within specific outcomes, the measurement instruments varied, and COS was rarely represented. CONCLUSION: The revealed differences in patient selection, intervention delivery, and outcome assessment highlight the need for more standardization in research on CP-led medication reviews. While intervention delivery should be more precisely described to capture potential differences between interventions, outcome assessment should be standardized in terms of outcome selection by application of the COS, and with regard to the selected core outcome measurement instruments to enable comparison of the results.


Assuntos
Serviços Comunitários de Farmácia , Farmacêuticos , Humanos , Serviços Comunitários de Farmácia/organização & administração , Farmacêuticos/organização & administração , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Seleção de Pacientes , Papel Profissional
2.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 81(15): e419-e430, 2024 Jul 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38660785

RESUMO

PURPOSE: A comprehensive medication history can contribute to safe therapy. Many approaches aiming to improve medication history taking require significant human resources. To design an efficient process that delivers high-quality medication histories, the individual requirements and resources of a given setting need to be considered. We aimed to provide an overview of existing approaches to medication history taking and their performance in different settings to potentially support the selection of an appropriate procedure. METHODS: We searched 3 literature databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO) for publications on approaches to medication history taking and analyzed them with regard to their key components as well as the setting, patient population, assessed outcomes, and efficacy. RESULTS: In total, 65 publications were included and analyzed. The majority of the reported approaches relied on involvement of dedicated staff (n = 43), followed by process-oriented interventions (eg, checklists; n = 15) and information technology (IT)-guided interventions (n = 11). A mean (SD) of 6 (2.9) outcomes were described in each study. Medication discrepancies were reported in 89% of all studies, yet about 75 different descriptions of this outcome were used, making it difficult to compare study results. Only 11 studies applied a sample size calculation and statistical tests. Of those, 10 reported a positive effect of their respective intervention on the quality of medication histories. CONCLUSION: Most approaches focused on pharmacy staff, which are associated with considerable cost and resources. Therefore, IT-based approaches and patient engagement should be investigated as cost-effective alternatives and tested for superiority in the same setting. Reporting guidelines and standardized methodology are needed to improve the comparability of such studies.


Assuntos
Reconciliação de Medicamentos , Humanos , Reconciliação de Medicamentos/métodos , Anamnese/métodos , Hospitais , Erros de Medicação/prevenção & controle , Serviço de Farmácia Hospitalar/organização & administração
3.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes ; 188: 1-13, 2024 Aug.
Artigo em Alemão | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38918158

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Discharge from hospital is a risk to drug continuity and medication safety. In Germany, new legal requirements concerning the management of patient discharge from the hospital came into force in 2017. They set minimum requirements for the documentation of medications in patient discharge summaries, which are the primary means of communication at transitions of care. Six years later, data on their practical implementation in routine care are lacking. METHODS: Within the scope of an explorative retrospective observational study, the minimum requirements were operationalized and a second set of assessment criteria was derived from the recommendation "Good Prescribing Practice in Drug Therapy" published by the Aktionsbündnis Patientensicherheit e.V. as a comparative quality standard. A sample of discharge summaries was drawn from routine care at the University Hospital Heidelberg and assessed according to their fulfilment of the criteria sets. In addition, the potential influence of certain context factors (e. g., involvement of clinical pharmacists or software usage) was evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 11 quality criteria were derived from the minimum requirements. According to the eligibility criteria (i. e., three or more discharge medications) 352 discharge summaries (42 wards; issued in May-July 2021), containing in total 3,051 medications, were included. The practical implementation of the minimum requirements for documenting medications in patient discharge summaries differed considerably depending on the criterion and defined context factors. Core elements (i. e., drug name, strength, and dosage at discharge) were fulfilled in 82.8 %, while further minimum requirements were rarely met or completely lacking (e. g., explanations for special pharmaceutical forms). Involvement of clinical pharmacists and usage of software were shown to be a facilitator of documentation quality, while on-demand medication (compared to long-term medication) as well as newly prescribed medication (compared to home medication or medication changed during hospitalisation) showed poorer documentation quality. In addition, the documentation quality seemed to depend on the department and the day of discharge. CONCLUSION: To date, the wording of the German legal requirements allows for different interpretations without considering the respective clinical setting and the medication actually prescribed. For future clarification of the requirements, implications of the wording for the clinical setting should be considered.


Assuntos
Documentação , Humanos , Alemanha , Estudos Retrospectivos , Documentação/normas , Alta do Paciente/legislação & jurisprudência , Alta do Paciente/normas , Sumários de Alta do Paciente Hospitalar/normas , Sumários de Alta do Paciente Hospitalar/legislação & jurisprudência , Hospitais Universitários/legislação & jurisprudência , Hospitais Universitários/normas , Reconciliação de Medicamentos/normas , Reconciliação de Medicamentos/legislação & jurisprudência
4.
JMIR Med Inform ; 12: e54428, 2024 Jun 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38842159

RESUMO

Background: Event analysis is a promising approach to estimate the acceptance of medication alerts issued by computerized physician order entry (CPOE) systems with an integrated clinical decision support system (CDSS), particularly when alerts cannot be interactively confirmed in the CPOE-CDSS due to its system architecture. Medication documentation is then reviewed for documented evidence of alert acceptance, which can be a time-consuming process, especially when performed manually. Objective: We present a new automated event analysis approach, which was applied to a large data set generated in a CPOE-CDSS with passive, noninterruptive alerts. Methods: Medication and alert data generated over 3.5 months within the CPOE-CDSS at Heidelberg University Hospital were divided into 24-hour time intervals in which the alert display was correlated with associated prescription changes. Alerts were considered "persistent" if they were displayed in every consecutive 24-hour time interval due to a respective active prescription until patient discharge and were considered "absent" if they were no longer displayed during continuous prescriptions in the subsequent interval. Results: Overall, 1670 patient cases with 11,428 alerts were analyzed. Alerts were displayed for a median of 3 (IQR 1-7) consecutive 24-hour time intervals, with the shortest alerts displayed for drug-allergy interactions and the longest alerts displayed for potentially inappropriate medication for the elderly (PIM). Among the total 11,428 alerts, 56.1% (n=6413) became absent, most commonly among alerts for drug-drug interactions (1915/2366, 80.9%) and least commonly among PIM alerts (199/499, 39.9%). Conclusions: This new approach to estimate alert acceptance based on event analysis can be flexibly adapted to the automated evaluation of passive, noninterruptive alerts. This enables large data sets of longitudinal patient cases to be processed, allows for the derivation of the ratios of persistent and absent alerts, and facilitates the comparison and prospective monitoring of these alerts.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA