'The way you talk, do I have a choice?' Patient narratives of medication decision-making during hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE: Based on the principle of the autonomy of the patient, shared decision-making (SDM) is the ideal approach in clinical encounters. In SDM, patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) share knowledge and power when faced with the task of making decisions. However, patients are often not involved in the decision-making process. In this study, we explore medication decision-making during hospitalization and how power in the specific patient-HCP relationship is articulated, as analysed by Foucauldian theory. METHODS: A qualitative case study, comprising observations of patient-HCP encounters at an internal medicines ward at a university hospital in Norway, followed by semi-structured interviews. The narratives (n = 4 patients) were selected from a larger study (n = 15 patients). The rationale behind the choice of these patients was to include diverse and rich accounts. The four patients in their 40s-70s were included close to the day of presumed discharge. RESULTS: The narratives provide an insight into the patients as persons, their perspectives, including what mattered to them during their hospitalization, especially in relation to medications. Overall, SDM was not observed in this study. Even though all the participants actively tried to keep their autonomous capacity and to resist the HCPs' use of power, they were not able to change the established dynamics. Moreover, they were not allowed an equal voice to those of HCPs and thus not to escape the system's objectification and subjectification of them. CONCLUSION: There is a need for HCPs to get more familiarized with SDM. The healthcare system and the individual HCP need to make more room for dialogue with the patients about their preferences. A part of this is also how health care systems are structured and scheduled, thus, it is important to empower patients and HCPs alike.

Implementation of pharmacogenetic testing in medication reviews in a hospital setting.

AIM: To investigate whether it is feasible to perform pharmacogenetic testing and implement the test results as part of medication reviews during hospitalization of multimorbid patients. METHODS: Patients with ≥2 chronic conditions and ≥5 regular drugs with at least one potential gene-drug interaction (GDI) were included from one geriatric and one cardiology ward for pharmacogenetic testing. After inclusion by the study pharmacist, blood samples were collected and shipped to the laboratory for analysis. For patients still hospitalized at the time when the pharmacogenetic test results were available, the information was used in medication reviews. Recommendations from the pharmacist on actionable GDIs were communicated to the hospital physicians, who subsequently decided on potential immediate changes or forwarded suggestions in referrals to general practitioners. RESULTS: The pharmacogenetic test results were available for medication review in 18 of the 46 patients (39.1%), where median length of hospital stay was 4.7 days (1.6-18.3). The pharmacist recommended medication changes for 21 of 49 detected GDIs (42.9%). The hospital physicians accepted 19 (90.5%) of the recommendations. The most commonly detected GDIs involved metoprolol (CYP2D6 genotype), clopidogrel (CYP2C19 genotype) and atorvastatin (CYP3A4/5 and SLCOB1B1 genotype). CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that implementation of pharmacogenetic testing for medication review of hospitalized patients has the potential to improve drug treatment before being transferred to primary care. However, the logistics workflow needs to be further optimized, as test results were available during hospitalization for less than half of the patients included in the study.

Clinical pharmacist intervention to improve medication safety for hip fracture patients through secondary and primary care settings: a nonrandomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture patients face a patient safety threat due to medication discrepancies and adverse drug reactions when they have a combination of high age, polypharmacy and several care transitions. Consequently, optimised pharmacotherapy through medication reviews and seamless communication of medication information between care settings is necessary. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the impact on medication management and pharmacotherapy. The secondary aim was to evaluate implementation of the novel Patient Pathway Pharmacist intervention for hip fracture patients. METHODS: Hip fracture patients were included in this nonrandomised controlled trial, comparing a prospective intervention group (n = 58) with pre-intervention controls who received standard care (n = 50). The Patient Pathway Pharmacist intervention consisted of the steps: (A) medication reconciliation at admission to hospital, (B) medication review during hospitalisation, (C) recommendation for the medication information in the hospital discharge summary, (D) medication reconciliation at admission to rehabilitation, and (E) medication reconciliation and (F) review after hospital discharge. The primary outcome measure was quality score of the medication information in the discharge summary (range 0-14). Secondary outcomes were potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) at discharge, proportion receiving pharmacotherapy according to guidelines (e.g. prophylactic laxatives and osteoporosis pharmacotherapy), and all-cause readmission and mortality. RESULTS: The quality score of the discharge summaries was significantly higher for the intervention patients (12.3 vs. 7.2, p < 0.001). The intervention group had significantly less PIMs at discharge (- 0.44 (95% confidence interval - 0.72, - 0.15), p = 0.003), and a higher proportion received prophylactic laxative (72 vs. 35%, p < 0.001) and osteoporosis pharmacotherapy (96 vs. 16%, p < 0.001). There were no differences in readmission or mortality 30 and 90 days post-discharge. The intervention steps were delivered to all patients (step A, B, E, F = 100% of patients), except step (C) medication information at discharge (86% of patients) and step (D) medication reconciliation at admission to rehabilitation (98% of patients). CONCLUSION: The intervention steps were successfully implemented for hip fracture patients and contributed to patient safety through a higher quality medication information in the discharge summary, fewer PIMs and optimised pharmacotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03695081.

The role of drug regulatory authorities and health technology assessment agencies in shaping incentives for antibiotic R&D: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Few antibiotics have entered the market in recent years despite the need for new treatment options. Some of the challenges of bringing new antibiotics to market are linked to the marketing authorization and health technology assessment (HTA) processes. Research shows great variation in geographic availability of new antibiotics, suggesting that market introduction of new antibiotics is unpredictable. We aimed to investigate regulatory authorities' and HTA agencies' role in developing non-financial incentives to stimulate antibiotic research and development (R&D). METHODS: We conducted individual, semi-structured, stakeholder interviews. Participants were recruited from regulatory authorities (EMA and FDA) and HTA agencies in Europe. Participants had to be experienced with assessment of antibiotics. The data were analyzed using a deductive and inductive approach to develop codes and identify key themes. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis including the constant comparison method to define concepts, and rival thinking to identify alternative explanations. RESULTS: We found that (1) interpretation of key concepts guiding the understanding of what type of antibiotics are needed vary (2) lack of a shared approach on how to deal with limited clinical data in the marketing authorization and HTA processes is causing barriers to getting new antibiotics to market (3) necessary adaptations to the marketing authorization process causes uncertainties that transmit to other key stakeholders involved in delivering antibiotics to patients. CONCLUSIONS: A shared understanding of limited clinical data and how to deal with this issue is needed amongst stakeholders involved in antibiotic R&D, marketing authorization, and market introduction to ensure antibiotics reach the market before resistance levels are out of control. Regulatory authorities and HTA agencies could play an active role in aligning the view of what constitutes an unmet medical need, and direct new economic models towards stimulating greater diversity in the antibiotic armamentarium.

Effect of integrated medicines management on the quality of drug treatment in hospitalised multimorbid patients - a secondary endpoint analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of integrated medicines management provided to hospitalised multimorbid patients on the quality of drug treatment at discharge measured as the mean number of potential prescribing omissions and potentially inappropriate medicines. METHODS: Multimorbid patients ≥18 years, using a minimum of four regular drugs from a minimum of two therapeutic drug classes, were recruited from the Internal Medicine ward, Oslo University Hospital, Norway, from August 2014 to March 2016 and randomly assigned, 1:1, to the intervention or control group. Intervention patients received integrated medicines management throughout the hospital stay. Control patients received standard care. This paper reports the results of a pre-specified secondary endpoint analysis of a randomised controlled trial; the difference between the intervention and control group at discharge in the mean number of potential prescribing omissions and potentially inappropriate medicines, measured with START-2 and STOPP-2 criteria, respectively. The difference between the groups was calculated using rank analysis. KEY FINDINGS: In total, 386 patients were analysed. Integrated medicines management reduced the mean number of potential prescribing omissions at discharge, compared to the control group, 1.34 versus 1.57, respectively (mean difference 0.23, 95% CI 0.07-0.38, P = 0.005, adjusted for values at admission). There was no difference in the mean number of potentially inappropriate medicines at discharge (1.84 versus 1.88, respectively; mean difference 0.03, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.25, P = 0.762, adjusted for values at admission). CONCLUSIONS: Integrated medicines management delivered to multimorbid patients during a hospital stay led to an improvement in undertreatment. No effect on deprescribing of inappropriate treatment was seen.

Medication management for patients with hip fracture at a regional hospital and associated primary care units in Norway: a descriptive study based on a survey of clinicians' experience and a review of patient records.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with hip fracture are at high risk of medication errors due to a combination of high age, comorbidities, polypharmacy and several care transitions after fracture. The aim was to study medication management tasks concerning patient safety: medication reconciliation, medication review and communication of key medication information in care transitions. DESIGN: Descriptive study comprising a self-administered clinician survey (MedHipPro-Q) and a retrospective review of hospital medical records of patients with hip fracture. SETTING: Regional hospital and the associated primary care units (South-Eastern Norway). PARTICIPANTS: The survey received responses from 253 clinicians, 61 medical doctors and 192 nurses, involved in the medication management of patients with hip fracture, from acute admittance to the regional hospital, through an in-hospital fast track, primary care rehabilitation and back to permanent residence. Respondents' representativeness was unknown, introducing a risk of selection and non-response bias, and extrapolating findings should be done with caution. The patient records review included a random sample of records of patients with hip fracture (n=50). OUTCOME MEASURES: Medication reconciliation, medication review and communication of medication information from two perspectives: the clinicians' (ie, experiences with medication management) and the practice (ie, documentation of completed medication management). RESULTS: In the survey, most clinicians stated they performed medication reconciliation (79%) and experienced that patients often arrived without a medication list after care transition (37%). Doctors agreed that more patients would benefit from medication reviews (86%). In the hospital patient records, completed medication reconciliation was documented in most patients (76%). Medication review was documented in 2 of 50 patients (4%). Discharge summary guidelines were followed fully for 3 of 50 patients (6%). CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a need for improved medication management for patients with hip fracture. Patients were at risk of medication information not being transferred correctly between care settings, and medication reviews seemed to be underused in clinical practice.

Health literacy in medication communication during hospital discharge: a qualitative study at an internal medicines ward in Norway.

OBJECTIVE: When discharged from hospital patients are often assumed to have sufficient health literacy (HL) to participate in their medical treatment and manage medical self-care after discharge. However, limited HL is a widespread concern and patient participation during discharge is lacking. In this study, we explore how HL influences medication communication during hospital discharge. DESIGN: A qualitative case study, comprising unstructured observations of patient-healthcare personnel (HCP) encounters followed by semistructured interviews. Data were analysed using content analysis. SETTING: An internal medicines ward at a university hospital in Norway. PARTICIPANT: Fifteen patients aged 40-89 years were included close to the day of discharge. RESULTS: The following themes describing dimensions of HL emerged: (1) access, (2) understand, (3) appraise and (4) apply. Most patients sought access to medication information from HCP, while some felt dependent on HCP to provide it. However, their abilities to understand, evaluate and make informed decisions were challenged, partly because HCPs' ability to adapt their communication to the patient's knowledgebase varied. CONCLUSION: The results give a broader understanding of how HL influences medication communication during hospital discharge. To consider central dimensions of HL is important to achieve optimal medication communication, as the communication only can be exercised within the frames of the patient's HL. The findings in this study support that HL should be described as a shared responsibility between the patients and HCP. Attention should be focused to the HCP's responsibility to adapt the communication to the patient's knowledgebase.

Effect of pharmacist-led inhaler technique assessment service on readmissions in hospitalized COPD patients: a randomized, controlled pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of pharmacist-led inhaler technique assessment service on readmissions and CAT-score in hospitalized COPD patients. Furthermore, to provide an effect estimate for sample size calculations for future studies and to gain experience on the feasibility of such studies. METHODS: A randomized controlled pilot study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to intervention or standard care. The primary endpoint was the difference in time to first readmission after hospital discharge between the treatment groups. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant effect on the time to readmission (median 41 days in the intervention group (19 patients) and 95 days in the control group (20 patients), HR 1.74, 95% CI 0.81-3.75, p = 0.16). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in CAT-score 2 months after discharge, median scores being 25.5 and 24 in the intervention and the control group, respectively (p = 0.29). There was, however, a reduction of 3.5 units in CAT-score from baseline to 2 months after discharge in the intervention group, compared to no change in the control group. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist-led inhaler technique training had no effect on time to readmission or CAT-score. Future studies in larger populations should consider focusing on patients with less severe COPD, exploring CAT-score as a primary endpoint, consider stratifying for important baseline variables and evaluate the acceptability of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Date of registration 01/10/2018. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT03691324.

Development and initial validation of MedHipPro-Q: a questionnaire assessing medication management of hip fracture patients in different care settings.

BACKGROUND: A validated questionnaire to assess medication management of hip fracture patients within and outside the hospital setting was lacking. The study aims were to describe the hip fracture patient pathway, and develop a valid and feasible questionnaire to assess clinicians' experience with medication management of hip fracture patients in different care settings throughout the patient pathway. METHODS: This qualitative, descriptive methodological study used strategic and snowball sampling. The questionnaire was developed, and face and content validity explored through interviews with stakeholders. Phase I described the hip fracture patient pathway, and identified questionnaire dimensions in semi-structured interviews with management and clinicians (n = 37). The patient pathway was also discussed in six meetings (n = 70). Phase II refined a first draft of the questionnaire through cognitive interviews with future respondents (n = 23). The draft was modified after each interview. Post hoc, cognitive interview data were analysed using matrix analysis to condense problems and solutions into themes and subthemes. Phase III, converted the final version to a digital format, and tested its feasibility with a subset of the cognitive interview participants (n = 21) who completed the questionnaire and provided feedback. RESULTS: Phase I: Hip fracture patients were cared for in at least three different care settings, and went through at least four handovers between and within primary and secondary care. Three questionnaire dimensions were identified: 1) Medication reconciliation and review, 2) Communication of key information, and 3) Profession and setting. Phase II: The MedHipPro-Q was representative of how the different professions experienced medication management in all settings, and hence showed face and content validity. Post hoc analysis: Problem themes (with sub-themes) were Representativeness (-of patient pathway and -of respondent reality) and Presentation (Language and Appearance). Solution themes (with sub-themes) were: Content (added or deleted) and Presentation (modified appearance or corrected language). Phase III: Participants did not identify technical, linguistic or content flaws in the questionnaire, and the digital version was considered feasible for use. CONCLUSION: The novel MedHipPro-Q showed good face and content validity, and was feasible for use throughout the hip fracture patient pathway. The rigorous development process supports its construct validity and reliability.

Exploring Acceptability Drivers of Oral Antibiotics in Children: Findings from an International Observational Study.

Antibiotics are among the most commonly prescribed drugs in children. Adherence to the treatment with these drugs is of the utmost importance to prevent the emergence of resistant bacteria, a global health threat. In children, medicine acceptability is likely to have a significant impact on compliance. Herein we used a multivariate approach, considering simultaneously the many aspects of acceptability to explore the drivers of oral antibiotic acceptability in children under twelve, especially in toddlers and in preschoolers. Based on 628 real-life observer reports of the intake of 133 distinct medicines, the acceptability reference framework highlighted the influence of many factors such as age and sex of patients, previous exposure to treatment, place of administration, administration device, flavor agent in excipients and active pharmaceutical ingredient. These findings from an international observational study emphasize the multidimensional nature of acceptability. Therefore, it is crucial to consider all these different aspects for assessing this multi-faceted concept and designing or prescribing a medicine in order to reach adequate acceptability in the target population.

Barcode medication administration technology use in hospital practice: a mixed-methods observational study of policy deviations.

INTRODUCTION: Barcode medication administration (BCMA) can, if poorly implemented, cause disrupted workflow, increased workload and cause medication errors. Further exploration is needed of the causes of BCMA policy deviations. OBJECTIVE: To gain an insight into nurses' use of barcode technology during medication dispensing and administration; to record the number and type of BCMA policy deviations, and to investigate their causes. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, mixed-methods study. Medication administration rounds on two hospital wards were observed using a digital tool and field notes. The SEIPS (Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety) model was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: We observed 44 nurses administering 884 medications to 213 patients. We identified BCMA policy deviations for more than half of the observations; these related to the level of tasks, organisation, technology, environment and nurses. Task-related policy deviations occurred with 140 patients (66%) during dispensing and 152 patients (71%) during administration. Organisational deviations included failure to scan 29% of medications and 20% of patient's wristbands. Policy deviations also arose due to technological factors (eg, low laptop battery, system freezing), as well as environmental factors (eg, medication room location, patient drawer size). Most deviations were caused by policies that interfere with proper and safe BCMA use and suboptimal technology design. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that adaptations of the work system are needed, particularly in relation to policies and technology, to optimise the use of BCMA by nurses during medication dispensing and administration. These adaptations should lead to enhanced patient safety, as the absolute goal with BCMA implementation.

Empowering the patient? Medication communication during hospital discharge: a qualitative study at an internal medicines ward in Norway.

OBJECTIVE: Effective communication and patient empowerment before hospital discharge are important steps to ensure medication safety. Patients discharged from hospitals are often expected to assume self-management, frequently without healthcare personnel (HCP) having ensured patients' knowledge, motivation and/or skills. In this substudy of a larger study, we explore how patients experience medication communication during encounters with HCPs and how they are empowered at hospital discharge. DESIGN: This is a qualitative case study. Data collection was done through qualitative observations of patient-HCP encounters, semistructured interviews with patients and drug reconciliation. Data were analysed using content analysis. SETTING: An internal medicines ward at a university hospital in Norway. PARTICIPANTS: Nine patients aged 49-90 years were included close to the day of discharge. RESULTS: The analysis revealed the following themes: (1) patient-centred care (PCC), which included 'understanding and involvement in the patient-as-person', 'establishment of a therapeutic alliance', and 'sharing power and responsibility'; and (2) biomedical (conventional) care, including the subthemes 'HCPs in power and control' and 'optimising medical outcomes, following guidelines'. Even though the elements of PCC were observed in several encounters, overall communication was not sufficiently fostering patient empowerment. Spending time with patients and building relations based on mutual trust seemed undervalued. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide a broader understanding of how patients experience medication communication at hospital discharge. Both the patients and the HCPs appear to be inculcated with biomedical traditions and are uncertain about the roles and opportunities associated with PCC. Attention should be paid to patient preferences and to the core elements of the PCC model from admission to discharge to empower patients in medication self-management.

The observer effect in a hospital setting - Experiences from the observed and the observers.

BACKGROUND: Observation studies are used in health care research, e.g. to explore behaviors of patients or health care professionals in hospitals. A methodological challenge in observation studies is the observer effect, as it can jeopardize the quality of a study. OBJECTIVES: To capture different dimensions of the observer effect through health care professionals' and patients' experiences, and their reactions to being observed in a hospital setting, and in addition, observers' experiences from performing an observation study. METHOD: Four focus group interviews (health care professionals and observers) and 10 individual interviews (patients) were conducted with participants from a Norwegian observation study focusing on medication communication at a hospital ward. In all 26 persons were interviewed, whereof 3 were observers (pharmacist, pharmacy students). Data were collected between September 2019 and January 2020 and analyzed by an inductive, thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Five main themes were identified; Experiencing being observed; Temporarily adapting medication communication behavior; Consequences for the patients; To interact or not - reflections on the relations and Observing the observers. Respondents reported some observer effects, but also that these diminished with time. Even though minimal interaction was used as a strategy, observers and the observed still built rapport. CONCLUSIONS: The observer effect in relation to medication communication seemed to be small and temporary in this specific hospital setting, among other things as staff and patients were used to extra persons (e.g. students) being around. Medication communication in hospital settings is a complex behavior, and appears to not be strongly impacted by the presence of observers, especially with a long observation time. It is important for researchers to monitor and record the observer effect in the specific setting of the study. This can be done by interviews with the observed and the observers by someone not connected to the observation study.

Discharge processes and medicines communication from the patient perspective: A qualitative study at an internal medicines ward in Norway.

BACKGROUND: Patients are expected to participate in the hospital discharge process, assume self-management after discharge and communicate relevant information to their general practitioner; however, patients report that they are not being sufficiently empowered to take on these responsibilities. The aim of this study was to explore and understand the discharge process with a focus on medicines communication, from the patient perspective. METHODS: Patients were included at a hospital ward, observed during health-care personnel encounters on the day of discharge and interviewed 1-2 weeks after discharge. A process analysis was performed, and a content analysis combined data from observations and data from patient interviews focusing on medicines communication in the discharge process. RESULTS: A total of 9 patients were observed on the day of discharge, equalling 67.5 hours of observations. The analysis resulted in the following themes: (a) the observed discharge process; (b) patient initiatives; and (c) the patient role. The medicines communication in the discharge process appeared unstructured. Various patient preferences and needs were revealed. The elements of the best practice structured discharge conversation were observed; however, some patients did not have a discharge conversation at all. CONCLUSIONS: The study contributes to a broader understanding of the discharge process, how patients experience it, including their role. It is evident that the discharge process is not always tailored to meet the patients' needs. More focus on early patient involvement and communication, in order to better prepare patients for self-management of their medications, is important for their health outcomes.

Effect of medicines management versus standard care on readmissions in multimorbid patients: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of pharmacist-led medicines management in multimorbid, hospitalised patients on long-term hospital readmissions and survival. DESIGN: Parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Recruitment from an internal medicine hospital ward in Oslo, Norway. Patients were enrolled consecutively from August 2014 to the predetermined target number of 400 patients. The last participant was enrolled March 2016. Follow-up until 31 December 2017, that is, 21-40 months. PARTICIPANTS: Acutely admitted multimorbid patients ≥18 years, using minimum four regular drugs from minimum two therapeutic classes. 399 patients were randomly assigned, 1:1, to the intervention or control group. After excluding 11 patients dying in-hospital and 2 erroneously included, the primary analysis comprised 386 patients (193 in each group) with median age 79 years (range 23-96) and number of diseases 7 (range 2-17). INTERVENTION: Intervention patients received pharmacist-led medicines management comprising medicines reconciliation at admission, repeated medicines reviews throughout the stay and medicines reconciliation and tailored information at discharge, according to the integrated medicines management model. Control patients received standard care. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was difference in time to readmission or death within 12 months. Overall survival was a priori the clinically most important secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Pharmacist-led medicines management had no significant effect on the primary endpoint time to readmission or death within 12 months (median 116 vs 184 days, HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.04, p=0.106). A statistically significantly increased overall survival was observed during 21-40 months follow-up (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.90, p=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist-led medicines management had no statistically significant effect on time until readmission or death. A statistically significant increased overall survival was seen. Further studies should be conducted to investigate the effect of such an intervention on a larger scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02336113.

Prevalence and risk factors of drug-related hospitalizations in multimorbid patients admitted to an internal medicine ward.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of risk factors for drug-related hospitalizations (DRHs) is limited. AIM: To examine the prevalence of DRHs and the relationships between DRHs and various variables in multimorbid patients admitted to an internal medicine ward. METHODS: Multimorbid patients ≥ 18 years, using minimum of four regular drugs from minimum two therapeutic classes, were included from the Internal Medicine ward, Oslo University Hospital, Norway, from August 2014 to March 2016. Clinical pharmacists prospectively conducted medicines reconciliations and reviews to reveal drug-related problems (DRPs). Blinded for identified DRPs, an interdisciplinary group retrospectively made comprehensive, clinical assessments of each patient case to classify hospitalizations as drug-related (DRH) or non-drug-related (non-DRH). Age, sex distribution, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), renal function, aberrant genotype frequencies, body-mass index, number of drugs, proportion of patients which received assistance for drug administration from the home care service, and/or through multidose-dispensed drugs, and occurrence of specific DRP subgroups, were compared separately between patients with DRHs versus non-DRHs, followed by multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Hospitalizations were classified as drug-related in 155 of the 404 included patients (38%). Factors significantly associated with DRHs were occurrence of adverse effect DRPs (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-8.0), adherence issues (OR 2.9, 1.1-7.2), home care (OR 1.9, 1.1-3.5), drug monitoring DRPs (OR 1.9, 1.2-3.0), and CCI score ≥6 (OR 0.33, 0.14-0.77). Frequencies of aberrant genotypes did not differ between the patient groups, but in 41 patients with DRHs (26.5%), gene-drug interactions influenced the assessments of DRHs. CONCLUSION: DRHs are prevalent in multimorbid patients with adverse effect DRPs and adherence issues as the most important risk factors.

Limited effect of structured medication report as the only intervention at discharge from hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether a structured medication report at discharge from the hospital could reduce the number of medication discrepancies in primary care. METHOD: The study was performed as an open, randomised controlled study including patients transferred from one hospital in Norway to nursing home or home care. Both groups received epicrisis on discharge. In addition, the intervention group received a structured medication report. After discharge, the medication list in primary care service was compared with the list at discharge and medication discrepancies identified. In addition, these medication lists were retrospectively compared with the lists prior to admission to the hospital and at admission to hospital. A questionnaire on time spent and quality of the medication information was filled in by nurses in primary care. RESULTS: Medication discrepancies were found for 72% (26) of the patients in the intervention group and 76% (42) in the control group (P=0.918). Most common was drugs omitted or committed to the medication lists in primary care service. Typically, the committed drugs in primary care were omitted drugs after admission to the hospital. Nurses used significantly less time (66%) obtaining medication information in the intervention group (P=0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Structured medication report as the only intervention did not reduce the medication discrepancies after discharge from hospital. There is a need for reconciliation at admission to ensure the quality of the medication report. Structured medication report resulted in the nurses spending less time on collecting medication information in primary care service.

Interventional study to improve adherence to phosphate binder treatment in dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to phosphate binder treatment is important to prevent high serum phosphate level in chronic dialysis patients. We therefore wanted to investigate patient knowledge, beliefs about and adherence to phosphate binders among these patients and assess whether one-to-one pharmacist-led education and counselling enhance adherence and lead to changes in serum phosphate levels. METHODS: A descriptive, interventional, single arm, pre-post study was performed at a hospital in Norway, including chronic dialysis patients aged 18 years or more using phosphate binders. The primary end-point was change in the proportion of patients with serum phosphate below 1.80 mmol/L and the secondary end-points included change in the patient's knowledge, beliefs and adherence after the intervention measured by completion of questionnaires 'Patient Knowledge', Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS- 5) and Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ). Data was collected both prior to and after one-to-one pharmacist-led education and counselling about their phosphate binders. Other medicines used by the patient was also registered. RESULTS: A total of 69 patients were enrolled in the study. After intervention, the probability of serum phosphate being below the target threshold 1.80 mmol/L (5.58 mg/dL) increased, although no significant change in mean serum phosphate levels was seen. On the other hand, the knowledge regarding phosphate binder treatment and the patients' beliefs about the necessity of the treatment increased, while the concerns decreased (BMQ). This effect did not lead to increase in self-reported adherence measured by MARS-5. However the scores were high before the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Short term one-to-one individualized pharmacist-led education and counselling about phosphate binders increased the probability of serum phosphate concentrations being below the target threshold level 1.80 mmol/L (5.58 mg/dL), although not statistically significant. However, it did not decrease the mean serum phosphate level or increase the patients' self-reported adherence. The patients increased their knowledge about the phosphate binder and their understanding of adherence, and were less concerned about the side effects of the medication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN52852596 , registered 11 April 2019. The trial was registered retrospectively.

Interdisciplinary collaboration across secondary and primary care to improve medication safety in the elderly (IMMENSE study): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Drug-related problems (DRPs) are common in the elderly, leading to suboptimal therapy, hospitalisations and increased mortality. The integrated medicines management (IMM) model is a multifactorial interdisciplinary methodology aiming to optimise individual medication therapy throughout the hospital stay. IMM has been shown to reduce readmissions and drug-related hospital readmissions. Using the IMM model as a template, we have designed an intervention aiming both to improve medication safety in hospitals, and communication across the secondary and primary care interface. This paper presents the study protocol to explore the effects of the intervention with regard to healthcare use, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and medication appropriateness in elderly patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A total of 500 patients aged ≥70 years will be included and randomised to control (standard care) or intervention group (1:1). The intervention comprises five steps mainly performed by pharmacists: (1) medication reconciliation at admission, (2) medication review during hospital stay, (3) patient counselling about the use of medicines, (4) a comprehensible and patient-friendly medication list with explanations in discharge summary and (5) postdischarge phone calls to the primary care level. The primary outcome is the difference between intervention and control patients in the rate of emergency medical visits (acute readmissions and visits to emergency department) 12 months after discharge. Secondary outcomes include length of index hospital stay, time to first readmission, mortality, hip fractures, strokes, medication changes, HRQoL and medication appropriateness. Patient inclusion started in September 2016. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial was approved by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data and the Norwegian Data Protection Authority. We aim to publish the results in international peer-reviewed open access journals, at national and international conferences, and as part of two PhD theses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02816086.