Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Harmonizing the definition of medication reviews for their collaborative implementation and documentation in electronic patient records: A Delphi consensus study.
Lias, Noora; Lindholm, Tanja; Holmström, Anna-Riia; Uusitalo, Marjo; Kvarnström, Kirsi; Toivo, Terhi; Nurmi, Harri; Airaksinen, Marja.
Affiliation
  • Lias N; Clinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. Box 56, 00014, Finland. Electronic address: noora.lias@helsinki.fi.
  • Lindholm T; Clinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. Box 56, 00014, Finland. Electronic address: tanja.p.lindholm@helsinki.fi.
  • Holmström AR; Clinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. Box 56, 00014, Finland. Electronic address: anna-riia.holmstrom@helsinki.fi.
  • Uusitalo M; Innovation and Development Unit, Istekki Ltd., P.O. Box 4000, FI-70601, Kuopio, Finland; Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, FI-33014, Finland. Electronic address: marjo.uusitalo@istekki.fi.
  • Kvarnström K; Clinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. Box 56, 00014, Finland; HUS Pharmacy, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, 00029, Helsinki, Finland; HUS Internal Medicine and Rehabilitation,
  • Toivo T; Clinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. Box 56, 00014, Finland; Hospital Pharmacy, Wellbeing Services County of Pirkanmaa, Tampere University Hospital, P.O. Box 272, FI-33101, Tampere, Finland. Electron
  • Nurmi H; Finnish Medicines Agency Fimea, P.O. Box 55, FI-00034, Fimea, Finland. Electronic address: harri.nurmi@fimea.fi.
  • Airaksinen M; Clinical Pharmacy Group, Division of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Viikinkaari 5 E, P.O. Box 56, 00014, Finland. Electronic address: marja.airaksinen@helsinki.fi.
Res Social Adm Pharm ; 20(6): 52-64, 2024 Jun.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38423929
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Medication review practices have evolved internationally in a direction in which not only physicians but also other healthcare professionals conduct medication reviews according to agreed practices. Collaborative practices have increasingly highlighted the need for electronic joint platforms where information on medication regimens and their implementation can be documented, kept updated, and shared.

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to harmonize the definition of medication reviews and create a unified conceptual basis for their collaborative implementation and documentation in electronic patient records (definition appellation collaborative medication review).

METHODS:

The study was conducted using the Delphi consensus survey with three interprofessional expert panel rounds in September-December 2020. The consensus rate was set at 80%. Experts assessed the proposed definition of collaborative medication review based on an international and national inventory of medication review definitions. The expert panel (n = 41) involved 12 physicians, 13 pharmacists, 10 nurses, and six information management professionals. The range of response rates for the rounds was 63-88%.

RESULTS:

The experts commented on which of the pre-selected items (n = 75) characterizing medication reviews should be included in the definition of collaborative medication review. The items were divided into the following five themes and 51 of them reached consensus 1) Actions included in the collaborative medication review (n = 24/24), 2) Settings where the review should be conducted (n = 5/5), 3) Situations where the review should be considered as needed and carried out (n = 10/11), 4) Prioritization of top five benefits to be achieved by the review and 5) Prioritization of top five patient groups to whom the review should be targeted.

CONCLUSIONS:

A strong interprofessional consensus was reached on the definition of collaborative medication review. The most challenging was to identify individual patient groups benefiting from the review.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Delphi Technique / Consensus / Documentation / Electronic Health Records Limits: Female / Humans / Male Language: En Year: 2024 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Delphi Technique / Consensus / Documentation / Electronic Health Records Limits: Female / Humans / Male Language: En Year: 2024 Type: Article