[HeiCare®: a project aiming to improve medication communication across health care sectors]. / HeiCare® : ein Projekt zur Verbesserung der sektorenübergreifenden Arzneimittelkommunikation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Changes between health care sectors represent a critical phase in long-term pharmacotherapy. The aim of the Hei CARE(®) project was to close the communication gap at the interface between primary care physicians (PCP), hospital physicians and patients, and to improve quality and safety of pharmacotherapy. METHODS: Physicians who enrolled patients with long-term pharmacotherapy were able to participate in the Hei CARE(®) project. After enrolment the patient's medication was entered in the internet-based medication knowledge data base AiD PRAXIS and checked for medication interactions and optimized if necessary. At hospitalisation medication was transferred electronically to the hospital (AiD KLINIK(®)) and on discharge integrated in the discharge letter and faxed to the primary care physician (PCP). The project was evaluated using quantitative and qualitative methods. Hei CARE(®) -cases, in which medication was transferred electronically as planned, were compared with the other cases. PCPs' experiences were collected in focus groups. RESULTS: One thousand and three chronically ill patients of 56 primary care practices participated. 259 patients were hospitalized between October 2005 and March 2009 of which entrance and discharge medication were transferred both ways via the electronic prescribing platform in 67 cases. The number of changes in medication was reduced in comparison to the other cases. Participating PCPs reported positive changes through Hei CARE(®) as well as further potential for optimizing communication across health care sectors. CONCLUSION: Use of a common internet-based medication knowledge data base (Hei CARE(®) ) in both health care sectors reduced the number of changes in pharmacotherapy. Seamless care in chronically ill patients was thereby improved. The project also demonstrated that improving communication across health care sectors is a slow process.

Patient-specific electronic decision support reduces prescription of excessive doses.

OBJECTIVES: Prescription of excessive doses is the most common prescription error, provoking dose-dependent adverse drug reactions. Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) can prevent prescription errors especially when mainly clinically relevant warnings are issued. We have built and evaluated a CDSS providing upper dose limits personalised to individual patient characteristics thus guaranteeing for specific warnings. METHODS: For 170 compounds, detailed information on upper dose limits (according to the drug label) was compiled. A comprehensive software-algorithm extracted relevant patient information from the electronic chart (eg, age, renal function, comedication). The CDSS was integrated into the local prescribing platform for outpatients and patients at discharge, providing immediate dosage feedback. Its impact was evaluated in a 90-day intervention study (phase 1: baseline; phase 2: intervention). Outcome measures were frequency of excessive doses before and after intervention considering potential induction of new medication errors. Moreover, predictors for alert adherence were analysed. RESULTS: In phase 1, 552 of 12,197 (4.5%) prescriptions exceeded upper dose limits. In phase 2, initially 559 warnings were triggered (4.8%, p=0.37). Physicians were responsive to one in four warnings mostly adjusting dosages. Thus, the final prescription rate of excessive doses was reduced to 3.6%, with 20% less excessive doses compared with baseline (p<0.001). No new manifest prescription errors were induced. Physicians' alert adherence correlated with patients' age, prescribed drug class, and reason for the alert. CONCLUSION: During the 90-day study, implementation of a highly specific algorithm-based CDSS substantially improved prescribing quality with a high acceptance rate compared with previous studies.

[Medical problems and risks of switching drugs according to legal requirements of drug discount contracts in Germany]. / Medizinische Probleme und Risiken bei der rabattvertragsgerechten Umstellung von Medikationen in Deutschland.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2007 German health insurance funds may conclude discount contracts with pharmaceutical companies for individual drugs. According to German legislation pharmacies are liable to preferentially dispense these drugs to patients of the respective funds if the prescribed drug is identical regarding active ingredient, strength, package size, and route of administration, and is approved for the same indication. We aimed to assess the number and nature of clinically relevant differences between prescribed drug and its legal alternatives. METHODS: Using databases and expert systems of the drug information system AiD KLINIK we evaluated all 258 412 exchangeable drug pairs of the German market currently regulated by discount contracts. RESULTS: 15,7 % of the drug pairs differed in dosage, in one quarter each colour or shape was significantly different, and in roughly 3 % the size of the substituted drug differed by more than 50 %. In 9,43 % splitting characteristics of solid oral doses differed and in 1,87 % the substituted drug contained additives with allergenic potential not present in the primarily selected drug. On average 0,44 clinically relevant differences could be calculated in each substitution. CONCLUSION: This study has revealed that current legal provision ignore important medical criteria of the substitution process including individual risks (e. g. allergies). Patients will have to change the drug application process and will therefore need appropriate information and training. All these differences between substitutional drug pairs should already be known when prescribing so as to maintain patient safety in the face of this merely cost-saving measure.

Detection and prevention of prescriptions with excessive doses in electronic prescribing systems.

INTRODUCTION: Dose dependent adverse drug reactions are often caused by prescribing errors ignoring upper dose limits. Thus, computerised physician order entry incorporating maximum recommended therapeutic doses (MRTDs) might reduce prescriptions of excessive doses. We evaluated the suitability of MRTD information as published in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) (MRTD(SPC)) or by the US Food and Drug Administration (MRTD(FDA)) and the value of Defined Daily Doses (DDD, World Health Organisation) as knowledge bases for an alerting system. METHODS: In a large set of critical-dose drugs (N = 140) we compared MRTD(FDA) and DDD values with the corresponding German MRTD(SPC). We then retrospectively assessed a set of 633 electronically prescribed drugs (EPDs) issued at a university hospital and calculated prescription rates of excessive doses. RESULTS: MRTD(FDA) was similar to MRTD(SPC) in 37% (N = 140), higher in 32%, and lower in 31% of drugs. On average, available DDD values (N = 129) were 1.6 times lower than MRTD(SPC), with 64% being lower, 33% similar, and 3% larger than MRTD(SPC). Prescription rates of excessive doses according to MRTD(FDA) were 2.5-fold higher (6.1%) than according to MRTD(SPC) (2.5%) (p < 0.01). However, only one in four EPDs categorised as overdosed according to MRTD(FDA) exceeded MRTD(SPC), and MRTD(FDA) values were available only for 67% of all assessed EPDs. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a remarkable number of prescriptions with doses exceeding approved limits. Their prevention appears feasible but the choice of an appropriate database for MRTDs is essential, and differences between available information sources are large.