Electronic Medication Reconciliation Tools Aimed at Healthcare Professionals to Support Medication Reconciliation: a Systematic Review.

The development of health information technology available and accessible to professionals is increasing in the last few years. However, a low number of electronic health tools included some kind of information about medication reconciliation. To identify all the electronic medication reconciliation tools aimed at healthcare professionals and summarize their main features, availability, and clinical impact on patient safety. A systematic review of studies that included a description of an electronic medication reconciliation tool (web-based or mobile app) aimed at healthcare professionals was conducted. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO: registration number CRD42022366662, and followed PRISMA guidelines. The literature search was performed using four healthcare databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus with no language or publication date restrictions. We identified a total of 1227 articles, of which only 12 met the inclusion criteria.Through these articles,12 electronic tools were detected. Viewing and comparing different medication lists and grouping medications into multiple categories were some of the more recurring features of the tools. With respect to the clinical impact on patient safety, a reduction in adverse drug events or medication discrepancies was detected in up to four tools, but no significant differences in emergency room visits or hospital readmissions were found. 12 e-MedRec tools aimed at health professionals have been developed to date but none was designed as a mobile app. The main features that healthcare professionals requested to be included in e-MedRec tools were interoperability, "user-friendly" information, and integration with the ordering process.

Chronic-pharma: New Platform for Chronic Patients Pharmacotherapy Optimization.

We describe the technological development of a web platform named CHRONIC-PHARMA that integrates three prescription support tools for patients with chronic diseases: Anticholinergic Burden Calculator (ABC), LESS-CHRON criteria and TRIGGER-CHRON. They focus on the optimization and evaluation of pharmacotherapy in patients with chronic diseases, resulting in a useful, single platform that can facilitate the review of pharmacotherapy and improve the safety of chronically ill patients. This is achieved by estimating and reducing the anticholinergic risk (ABC), detecting opportunities for deprescribing drugs and monitoring its success (LESS-CHRON criteria), as well as calculating the risk of adverse drug events (TRIGGER-CHRON). The platform is freely accessible online ( https://chronic-pharma.com/ ) as well as through a mobile application, and therefore easily accessible among the healthcare community.

Association between Anticholinergic Burden and Constipation: A Systematic Review.

The association between anticholinergic burden and constipation is not well defined and documented; for this reason, a systematic review was carried out in five databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Scopus), including studies assessing the correlation between anticholinergic burden, and constipation between January 2006 and December 2020. Data extraction was conducted independently by two researchers. Abstracts and titles were reviewed to determine eligibility for review with eligible articles read in full. From 2507 identified articles, 11 were selected for this review: six cross-sectional studies, four retrospective cohort studies, and a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Overall, nine studies reported at least one statistical association between anticholinergic burden and constipation, finding 13 positive results out of 24 association measurements. A total of 211,921 patients were studied. The association between constipation and anticholinergic burden could be demonstrated in studies including 207,795 patients. Most studies were not designed to find differences in constipation prevalence and did not adjust the results by confounding factors. Our findings suggest that a correlation between anticholinergic burden and constipation exists. Higher quality-evidence studies are needed, including analysis that considers confounding factors, such as other non-pharmacological causes of constipation.

Development of a Trigger Tool to Identify Adverse Drug Events in Elderly Patients With Multimorbidity.

PURPOSE: Elderly patients with multimorbidity are especially vulnerable to adverse drug events (ADEs) and had high prevalence rates. Identifying ADEs is essential for enabling timely interventions that can mitigate the adverse events detected and for developing targeted strategies to prevent their occurrence as well as to monitor implementation. The aim of this study was to develop a set with appropriate triggers for detecting potential ADEs in elderly patients with multimorbidity. METHODS: A modified Delphi methodology was used to reach consensus. Existing triggers for detecting ADEs in adult patients were identified from a literature search in several databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and Cochrane Library) and from Institute for Healthcare Improvement published lists. Twelve experts in patient/medication safety or in chronic diseases scored candidate triggers for appropriateness according to 3 criteria (evidence, usefulness for elderly patients, and feasibility of implementation in clinical practice). RESULTS: Seventy-two triggers were initially selected to be evaluated. The final set includes a total of 51 triggers for which the panelists who completed the 2 rounds of evaluation reached agreement. These triggers were organized into 5 modules: 11 as care module triggers, 10 as antidotes/treatment, 11 medication concentrations, 18 abnormal laboratory values, and 1 as emergency department trigger. CONCLUSIONS: A set of triggers for detecting ADEs in elderly patients with multimorbidity have been developed, following the consensus of a panel of experts. Subsequent validation in clinical practice is needed to confirm the accuracy and efficiency of these triggers for this population.

Intervention effectiveness by pharmacists integrated within an interdisciplinary health team on chronic complex patients.

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, it is difficult to establish a specific method of intervention by the pharmacist and its clinical repercussions. Our aim was to identify interventions by pharmacists integrated within an interdisciplinary team for chronic complex patients (CCPs) and determine which of them produce the best results. METHODS: A systematic review (SR) was performed based on PICO(d) question (2008-18): (Population): CCPs; (Intervention): carried out by health system pharmacists in collaboration with an interdisciplinary team; (Comparator): any; (Outcome): clinical and health resources usage outcomes; (Design): meta-analysis, SR and randomized clinical trials. RESULTS: Nine articles were included: one SR and eight randomized clinical trials. The interventions consisted mainly in putting in order the pharmacotherapy and the review of the medication adequacy, medication reconciliation in transition of care and educational intervention for health professionals. Only one showed significant improvements in mortality (27.9% vs. 38.5%; HR = 1.49; P = 0.026), two in health-related quality of life [according to EQ-5D (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions) and EQ-VAS (European Quality of Life-Visual Analog Scale) tests] and four in other health-related results (subjective self-assessment scales, falls or episodes of delirium and negative health outcomes associated with medication). Significant differences between groups were found in hospital stay and frequency of visits to the emergency department. No better results were observed in hospitalization rate. Otherwise, one study measured cost utility and found a cost of €45 987 per quality-adjusted life year gained due to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: It was not possible to determine with certainty which interventions produce the best results in CCPs. The clinical heterogeneity of the studies and the short follow-up of most studies probably contributed to this uncertainty.

Validation of the LESS-CHRON criteria: reliability study of a tool for deprescribing in patients with multimorbidity.

OBJECTIVE: The 'LESS-CHRON criteria' (List of Evidence-Based Deprescribing for Chronic Patients criteria) is a newly created tool with 27 criteria to guide deprescribing. It was developed using a Delphi methodology. Each criterion consists of drugs and their indications, conditions under which deprescribing would be considered, a health variable to be monitored after deprescribing and a follow-up period. The aim of our study was to evaluate the reliability of the LESS-CHRON criteria in a population of patients with multimorbidity to determine the possible usefulness of this tool in clinical practice. METHODS: We selected chronic patients with multimorbidity from an internal medicine unit who were older than 80 years old and were alive at the time of the study. To determine interobserver reliability, each professional (internist or hospital pharmacy specialist) applied the questionnaire under the same conditions and with the same resources. To determine intraobserver reliability, each health professional applied the tool at baseline and 2 months later. We measured interobserver and intraobserver reliability using the kappa coefficient. The proportion of overall agreement was also determined. RESULTS: We obtained a moderate overall kappa (ĸ=0.46, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.55) for interobserver reliability, and good (ĸ=0.65, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.78) and moderate (ĸ=0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.74) values for intraobserver reliability for the internist and pharmacist, respectively. The proportion of overall agreement was very high: 92% (range: 62%-100%) for the interobserver, and 94% (80%-100%) and 93% (63%-100%) for the internist and pharmacist, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The LESS-CHRON criteria shows early promise as a reliable method to help guide deprescribing in patients with multimorbidity. Further, more complete testing with a larger sample of prescribers is needed.

A multidisciplinary approach for patients with multiple chronic conditions: IMPACTO study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of a multidisciplinary intervention on the outcomes of polypathological patients (PP). METHODS: A multicenter quasi-experimental pre-post study with a 12-month follow up was performed. In-hospital, at discharge and outpatient clinics patients who met criteria of PP between March 2012 and October 2013 were included. The multidisciplinary approach was defined by 11 interventions performed by general practitioners, internal medicine physicians, team care nurses and hospital pharmacists. The primary outcome was reduction in the number of hospital admissions and days of hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included mortality and the effects of 11 interventions on mortality. RESULTS: 420 patients were included. Mean patient age was 77.3 (SD: 8.90) and average number of PP defining categories was 2.99 (SD: 1.00). Number of hospital admissions and days of hospitalization decreased significantly after intervention: 1.52 (SD: 1.35) versus 0.82 (SD: 1.29), p<0.001, and 13.77 (SD: 15.20) versus 7.21 (SD: 12.90), p<0.001 respectively. 12-month mortality was 37.7%. PP who failed to receive a structured medical visit from the internal medicine physician and educational workshops from the team care nurses had a higher risk of exitus in the next 12 months, HR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.15-2.46, p=0.007 and HR: 2.86; 95% CI: 1.92-4.27, p<0.001, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This multidisciplinary intervention reduced the risk of PP hospital admission and days of hospitalization. Educational workshop programs for PP and their caregivers and structured IM medical visits were associated with improvements of survival.

Association Between Drug Burden Index and Functional and Cognitive Function in Patients with Multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Anticholinergic and sedative drugs are associated with adverse events such as cognitive and functional impairment in elderly. The Drug Burden Index (DBI) is a measure of an individual's total exposure to anticholinergic and sedative drugs. Objetive: The study aimed to evaluate the association between the total DBI and cognitive and functional impairment in patients with multimorbidity. SETTING: Patients with multimorbidity enrolled in the IMPACTO project. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The anticholinergic and sedative exposure was calculated using DBI. The Pfeiffer Test (PT) was used for cognitive status and the Barthel Index (BI) for functional status. RESULTS: 336 patients were included (mean age 77.6 ± 8.7 years, 54.2% men and a mean of 11.5 ± 3.7 prescribed drugs). 180 patients (53.6%) exposed to anticholinergic and/or sedative drugs were identified. The median score obtained in PT was slightly higher in exposed patients (1 (IQR 0-2) and 2 (IQR 0-4), p = 0.082 in "non-exposed" and "exposed", respectively). The bivariate analysis showed an association [0.544 (95% CI 0.044-1.063, p = 0.03)]. The median obtained in the BI analysis was 85.0 (IQR 30.0) and 75.5 (IQR 42.5) p = 0.002, in "nonexposed" and "exposed", respectively. After the adjusted analysis, a relationship was obtained between both the variables [-9,558 (95% CI-15,794; -3,321, p = 0.03)]. CONCLUSION: Higher DBI is associated with the impairment of functional status and, slightly to the deterioration of cognitive function in patients with multimorbidity. DBI should be considered in patients with multimorbidity to optimize the pharmacological treatment of a group of special interest due to its vulnerability.

Novel tool for deprescribing in chronic patients with multimorbidity: List of Evidence-Based Deprescribing for Chronic Patients criteria.

AIM: To create a tool to identify drugs and clinical situations that offers an opportunity of deprescribing in patients with multimorbidity. METHODS: A literature review completed with electronic brainstorming, and subsequently, a panel of experts using the Delphi methodology were applied. The experts assessed the criteria identified in the literature and brainstorming as possible situations for deprescribing. They were also asked to assess the influence of life prognosis in each criterion. A tool was composed of the most appropriate criteria according to the strength of their evidence, usefulness in patients with multimorbidity and applicability in clinical practice. RESULTS: Out of a total of 100, 27 criteria were selected to be included in the final list. It was named the LESS-CHRON criteria (List of Evidence-baSed depreScribing for CHRONic patients), and was organized by the anatomical group of the Anatomical, Therapeutic, Chemical (ATC) classification system of the drug to be deprescribed. Each criterion contains: drug indication for which it is prescribed, clinical situation that offers an opportunity to deprescribe, clinical variable to be monitored and the minimum time to follow up the patient after deprescribing. CONCLUSIONS: The "LESS-CHRON criteria" are the result of a comprehensive and standardized methodology to identify clinical situations for deprescribing drugs in chronic patients with multimorbidity. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2017; 17: 2200-2207.

[Methodological guideline for the efficacy and safety assessment of new pharmaceuticals: implementation of EUnetHTA's recommendations]. / Guía metodológica para la evaluación de la eficacia y la seguridad de nuevos fármacos: implementación de las recomendaciones de EUnetHTA.

The European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) is the network of public health technology assessment (HTA) agencies and entities from across the EU. In this context, the HTA Core Model®, has been developed. The Andalusian Agency for Health Technology Assessment (AETSA) is a member of the Spanish HTA Network and EUnetHTA collaboration In addition, AETSA participates in the new EUnetHTA Joint Action 3 (JA, 2016-2019). Furthermore, AETSA works on pharmaceutical assessments. Part of this work involves drafting therapeutic positioning reports (TPRs) on drugs that have recently been granted marketing authorisation, which is overseen by the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS). AETSA contributes by drafting "Evidence synthesis reports: pharmaceuticals" in which a rapid comparative efficacy and safety assessment is performed for drugs for which a TPR will be created. To create this type of report, AETSA follows its own methodological guideline based on EUnetHTA guidelines and the HTA Core Model®. In this paper, the methodology that AETSA has developed to create the guideline for "Evidence synthesis reports: pharmaceuticals" is described. The structure of the report itself is also presented.

Continuous versus intermittent piperacillin/tazobactam infusion in infection due to or suspected pseudomonas aeruginosa.

BACKGROUND: There is lack of information on the efficacy and safety of piperacillin­tazobactam administered by continuous infusion. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether continuous infusion of piperacillin­tazobactam is superior in terms of efficacy to a 30 % higher dose administered by intermittent infusion to treat suspected or confirmed infection due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Setting Multicenter clinical trial with 11 third level Spanish hospitals. METHOD: Randomized, double-blind parallel-group clinical trial, controlled by conventional administration of the drug. Patients randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive piperacillin­tazobactam as continuous infusion (CI) or intermittent (II). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary efficacy endpoint was percentage of patients having a satisfactory clinical response at completion of treatment, defined as clinical cure or clinical improvement. Adverse events were reported. Results 78 patients were included, 40 in the CI group and 38 in the II group. Mean (standard deviation) duration of treatment was 7 (±4.44) days. 58 patients (74.4 %) experienced cure or improvement at the end of the treatment. There were no statistical differences in cure rates between the two treatment arms and no adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Continuous infusion of piperacillin­tazobactam is an alternative administration drug method at least similar in efficacy and safety to conventional intermittent infusion. Multivariate analysis is needed to determine whether continuous administration might be more beneficial than intermittent in certain patient subgroups.

Systematic review on the use of anticholinergic scales in poly pathological patients.

PURPOSE: Anticholinergic drugs may increase the risk of cognitive and functional disorders in older patients. There are anticholinergic scales on which said risk is estimated. The objectives of this study are: to identify the scales described in literature that are applicable to polypathological patients and analyze their clinical outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review was performed. Data sources were MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science which were consulted until August 2014. INCLUSION CRITERIA: (1) studies that specify the list of drugs, describe the methodology for their elaboration and how they calibrate the anticholinergic potential and (2) studies that use the scales identified as a tool to measure exposure to anticholinergic drugs in polypathological patients or those with similar characteristics. The main differences between the scales and main results on cognitive, functional and mortality status were collected. RESULTS: 25 articles were included. 10 scales were identified. For their preparation, 8 were based on literature about drugs with anticholinergic activity and/or previously published scales as well as expert opinions. Exposure to anticholinergic drugs has been linked to cognitive disorders (basically measured with Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS), Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Scale (ACB) and Drug Burden Index (DBI)) and functional scale (with ARS and DBI). However, there is no clear relationship with mortality. The Anticholinergic Drug Scale was the only one that obtained no association with any of the variables studied. CONCLUSIONS: There is a great variety of scales published and applied to older patients. The clinical results are different depending on the scale used which is probably due to the different methodology in their elaboration.

[Pharmacological treatment conciliation methodology in patients with multiple conditions]. / Metodología de conciliación del tratamiento farmacológico en pacientes pluripatológicos.

OBJECTIVE: To carry out a bibliographic review in order to identify the different methodologies used along the reconciliation process of drug therapy applicable to polypathological patients. DESIGN: We performed a literature review. Data sources The bibliographic review (February 2012) included the following databases: Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Spanish Medical Index (IME). The different methodologies, identified on those databases, to measure the conciliation process in polypathological patients, or otherwise elderly patients or polypharmacy, were studied. Study selection Two hundred and seventy three articles were retrieved, of which 25 were selected. Data extraction Specifically: the level of care, the sources of information, the use of registration forms, the established time, the medical professional in charge and the registered variables such as errors of reconciliation. RESULTS: Most of studies selected when the patient was admitted into the hospital and after the hospital discharge of the patient. The main sources of information to be highlighted are: the interview and the medical history of the patient. An established time is not explicitly stated on most of them, nor the registration form is used. The main professional in charge is the clinical pharmacologist. Apart from the home medication, the habits of self-medication and phytotherapy are also identified. The common errors of reconciliation vary from the omission of drugs to different forms of interaction with other medicinal products (drugs interactions). CONCLUSIONS: There is a large heterogeneity of methodologies used for reconciliation. There is not any work done on the specific figure of the polypathological patient, which precisely requires a standardized methodology due to its complexity and its susceptibility to errors of reconciliation.

[Medication reconciliation on hospital admission in patients with multiple chronic diseases using a standardised methodology]. / Errores de conciliación al ingreso hospitalario en pacientes pluripatológicos mediante metodología estandarizada.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of medication errors when admitting patients with multiple chronic conditions to hospital, using a standard method. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A prospective, observational study was conducted on patients with multiple chronic conditions admitted to a tertiary hospital. The medication reconciliation was performed using the standard method considered the most suitable for these patients by an expert panel, following the Delphi methodology. The main information source used for this was the computerised clinical notes, both in primary care and in the hospital, recurring to a clinical interview if necessary. Discrepancies justified by the clinician, as well as reconciliation errors were recorded. The type of error and the pharmacological group involved were analysed and the seriousness of each one of them was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients were included, with reconciliation errors being found in 75.4% of cases. The patients had 1397 prescribed drugs, of which 234 had discrepancies that required clarification by the clinician responsible. The clinician modified the prescription in 184 of these discrepancies, which were considered reconciliation errors. The types of error were: medication omission (139), commission (9), dose, prescription or different routes (24) and by incomplete prescription (12). Anti-anaemic drugs, vitamins, and psychoanaleptics were among the pharmacotherapeutic groups most affected by the errors. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of patients with multiple chronic conditions with errors is elevated. The development of methods particularly directed at patients with multiple chronic conditions manages to detect and decrease a high percentage of medication errors associated with changes of care levels.