Strategies to Enhance Patient Care and Compliance with Pain Order Duplications and Gaps.

According to the Joint Commission every patient has a right to pain management. Due to multimodal pain management, pain orders have the potential for duplication as well as gaps in therapy. At our institution, we evaluated pain orders and implemented strategies that aimed to reduce those gaps. We found that current ordering practices permitted the use of varying visual analog scale (VAS) ranges (e.g., VAS 1-3 and 1-5) which inherently increased the potential for duplicate therapies. When gaps in therapy occurred, medication orders for corresponding VAS scores were not available and thus, therapy was delayed. Additionally, current administration policies did not take into account patient preferences for less potent agents which can also cause a delay in care. In summary, simple strategies, discussed in this article, may be implemented at the hospital level to optimize patient care while maintaining recommendations by the Joint Commission for clear medication orders.

Promoting ß-lactam utilization through suppression of electronic medical record cross-allergy alerts.

PURPOSE: Current literature surrounding management of patients with reported ß-lactam allergies focuses on allergy delabeling. Standard clinical decision support tools have not been optimized to be compatible with the currently accepted cross-reaction rate of 1% to 2%. This potentially promotes use of non-ß-lactam antibiotics, which are often not first-line therapy and may carry increased risks. The impact of electronic medical record (EMR) clinical decision support tool optimization on utilization of ß-lactam antibiotics in ß-lactam-allergic patients was evaluated. METHODS: A retrospective pre-post ß-lactam cross-allergy EMR alert suppression quality improvement intervention cohort study of ß-lactam-allergic adult inpatients prescribed antibiotics was conducted. Preintervention baseline data were collected for an initial cohort admitted during September 2018. The intervention, in which clinical decision support rules were updated to display ß-lactam cross-sensitivity allergy alerts only for ß-lactam-allergic patients with documentation of organization-defined high-severity reactions of anaphylaxis, hives, and shortness of breath, was implemented August 20, 2019. The postintervention cohort included patients admitted during September 2019. RESULTS: A 91% increase in the percentage of ß-lactam-allergic patients who received a ß-lactam agent at any time during their admission was noted after the intervention (26.6% vs 51%, P < 0.001). Statistically significant decreases in prescribing of alternative antibiotic classes were seen for fluoroquinolones (decrease from 45.3% to 26%, P < 0.001), aminoglycosides (decrease from 9.4% to 2.9%, P = 0.002), and aztreonam (decrease from 30% to 16.7%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: EMR ß-lactam cross-allergy alert optimization consistent with current literature significantly improved the utilization of alternative ß-lactam subclasses, mostly through ß-lactam prescribing as initial therapy in ß-lactam-allergic patients.

Evaluation of Time Spent by Pharmacists and Nurses Based on the Location of Pharmacist Involvement in Medication History Collection.

BACKGROUND: Accurate history collection is integral to medication reconciliation. Studies support pharmacy involvement in the process, but assessment of global time spent is limited. The authors hypothesized the location of a medication-focused interview would impact time spent. METHODS: The objective was to compare time spent by pharmacists and nurses based on the location of a medication-focused interview. Time spent by the interviewing pharmacist, admitting nurse, and centralized pharmacist verifying admission orders was collected. Patient groups were based on whether the interview was conducted in the emergency department (ED) or medical floor. The primary end point was a composite of the 3 time points. Secondary end points were individual time components and number and types of transcription discrepancies identified during medical floor interviews. RESULTS: Pharmacists and nurses spent an average of ten fewer minutes per ED patient versus a medical floor patient (P = .028). Secondary end points were not statistically significant. Transcription discrepancies were identified at a rate of 1 in 4 medications. Post hoc analysis revealed the time spent by pharmacists and nurses was 2.4 minutes shorter per medication when interviewed in the ED (P < .001). DISCUSSION: The primary outcome was statistically and clinically significant. Limitations included inability to blind and lack of cost-saving analysis. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist involvement in ED medication reconciliation leads to time savings during the admission process.