Incidence of drug-related adverse events related to the use of high-alert drugs: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Background: High-alert medication (HAM) is more predictable to cause significant harm to the patient, even when used as intended. The damage related to the HAM lead not only suffering to the patient, but also raise the additional costs associated with care. Objective: Evaluate the incidence of drug-related adverse events related to the use of high-alert medications. Methods: It was conducted an active search for information through COCHRANE databases, LILACS, SciELO, SCOPUS, PubMed/MEDLINE and WEB OF SCIENCE. The search strategy included the following terms: "Patient safety", "Medication errors" and "Hospital" and "High Alert Medications" or "Dangerous Drugs" in different combinations. Then two reviewers independently conducted a preliminary evaluation of relevant titles, abstracts and finally full-text. Studies quality was evaluated according to PRISMA declaration. Results: The systematic review evaluated seven articles, which showed that only 11 HAM identified in the literature could have serious events. The most frequently cited were warfarin (22.2%) which progressed from deep vein thrombosis to gangrene, suggesting lower initial doses, followed by cyclophosphamide (22.2%) and cyclosporine (22.2%) which presented invasive fungal infection and death. In addition to these, morphine was compared with its active metabolite (M6G), with M6G causing fewer serious clinical events related to nausea and vomiting, reducing the need for concomitant use of antiemetics. Conclusions: The most reported drug classes in the articles included that were related to incidence of drug-related adverse events in use of high-alert medications: morphine, M6G-glucuronide, haloperidol, promethazine, ivabradine, digoxin, warfarin, ximelagatran, cyclophosphamide, cyclosporine, and ATG. The formulate protocols for the use of these medications, with importance placed on evaluating, among the classes, the medication that causes the least harm.

Quality indicators of hospitalized children influenced by clinical pharmacist services: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Care for children who are hospitalized can be optimized if the pharmacist, in conjunction with the multidisciplinary team, promotes the rational use of medicines. In this sense, the evaluation of the quality of these clinical services through indicators is important in the planning, decision making of pharmacists and managers of these services. OBJECTIVE: To characterize which health indicators were influenced by the pharmaceutical clinical services for the care of children in hospitals. METHODS: A systematic review was performed. The search for data was made on the bases: Cochrane, Embase, Lilacs, Pubmed and Web of Science. Then, the search included studies in which evaluated the impact of pharmaceutical clinical services on clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes. RESULTS: The search resulted in 11 included studies. In this review, four pharmaceutical clinical services were found: pharmacotherapy review, multiprofessional team interventions, antimicrobial stewardship program and pharmaceutical services at discharge hospital. The most influenced outcome indicators were length of hospital stay, with average time in the group that received the pharmacotherapy review service, and interventions multiprofessional team with a 6.45-day vs. 10.83 days in the control group; hospital readmissions with a significant reduction of non-scheduled readmission of 30 days in the ntimicrobial stewardship program; reduction of hospital costs and caregiver satisfaction. CONCLUSION: In this study, we can highlight that pharmacotherapy review, multiprofessional team interventions and Antimicrobial Stewardship Program that significantly reduced the clinical results of length of hospital stay and hospital readmission, as well as a significant reduction of hospital costs.

The Pharmacoeconomic Impact of Pharmaceutical Care in the Hospital: Protocol for an Overview of Systematic Reviews.

BACKGROUND: The clinical activities developed by pharmacists in a hospital environment can improve health outcomes and generate savings for hospitals. However, to determine whether pharmaceutical interventions are cost effective, it is essential to define a method according to which cost-effectiveness is intended to be measured. In addition, the quality of economic assessments and the amount of information present in systematic reviews in the literature make it difficult to analyze the effects of this intervention. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to provide an overview of systematic reviews on the pharmacoeconomic impact of the performance of pharmaceutical care in hospitals. METHODS: A systematic search of the Cochrane Library databases, PubMed or MEDLINE, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Open Thesis will be performed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. The search will involve the use of keywords determined using the Medical Subject Headings database to define the search terms and include the following terms: "pharmacoeconomics," "pharmaceutical care," and "hospital." The study designs to be included will be systematic reviews of good quality. Studies will be included that address pharmacoeconomics; studies that evaluated pharmaceutical care in hospitals; and studies published in Portuguese, English, or Spanish. The primary outcome sought in the systematic reviews will be the cost ratio in monetary units and the outcomes in monetary or natural units. The secondary economic outcomes considered will be determined based on factors associated with the drugs and translated into benefit, efficacy, or utility. RESULTS: It is intended to start this overview in January 2023. Thus far, only previous searches have been carried out to contextualize the theme and build the protocol. CONCLUSIONS: This overview will determine the pharmacoeconomic impact of pharmaceutical care interventions in the hospital environment. In addition, this study will point out which clinical outcomes in natural units are impacted by the performance of pharmaceutical care and the strengths and limitations of each approach. It will also identify gaps in the literature and areas for future work. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019140665; https://tinyurl.com/bddwnz43.

Cost-effectiveness of medication reconciliation performed by a pharmacist in pediatrics of a hospital: A randomized clinical trial protocol linked to a pharmacoeconomic study.

INTRODUCTION: Each patient admitted to the hospital is subject to one medication error per day, since the occurrence of this one with the potential to cause harm is three times more common in pediatric hospitalized patients than in adults. These harms can result from inaccurate or incomplete drug use histories when patients undergo a clinical evaluation, which jeopardizes patient safety and compromises hospitalization costs. Thus, medication reconciliation (MC) emerges as a possible solution to avoid the occurrence of these in pediatric patients and directly contributes to reducing costs in the hospital environment and increasing quality of life). Therefore, this study proposes to determine whether pharmacist-led medication reconciliation is a cost-effective strategy to improve health outcomes in pediatric patients. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial will be carried out, over eight months, to carry out the cost analysis. Micro-costing pharmacoeconomic model through a questionnaire and clinical interview to collect the variables necessary for the study and comparison of the control and intervention groups. Participants in this study will be children aged 0 days to 12 years, admitted to the hospital. The perspective adopted will be that of the hospital. To assess the economic outcomes of MC, the cost-effect pairs will be categorized and visually represented in the cost-effectiveness plan to compare the intervention and control groups. Monte Carlo simulation and univariate sensitivity analysis will be performed to test the robustness of the findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The clinical trial was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Sergipe (CAAE: 19625319.6.0000.5546 and opinion number: 3,630,579). This protocol fully adhered to the recommendations of the 2010 CONSORT Declaration and was registered in the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC): RBR-25dnqsk.

Development and implementation of a medication reconciliation during pediatric transitions of care in a public hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To generate effective changes in the work processes of an institution, such as hospitals, strategies are needed for the implementation of services. These should be based on the needs of the practice scenario and evidence that may develop programs applied to the routine of health care. This study aimed to implement medication reconciliation (MR) at the transition of care in the pediatric department of a public hospital located in Northeast Brazil. SETTING: A step-by-step approach was adopted to implement MR in the studied hospital and conducted from March 2019 to December 2019. PRACTICE INNOVATION: The implementation of MR used the "Model for Improvement" framework. The processes were built and tested in the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles. Children admitted to the hospital's pediatrics department were included in the study. The objective of the PDSA cycles was to reach 75% of the patients included, with the service performed in at least one transition of care episode. EVALUATION: This study used the following indicators: number of steps performed, number of discrepancies identified, and resolution of discrepancies. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed for all variables. RESULTS: In the first cycle, all patients (n = 34) had the best possible medication history (BPMH) completed, and 26.4% went through all the MR stages. Seventy-two discrepancies were identified and 90.3% of them were resolved. In the second cycle, all patients (n = 35) had the BPMH completed, and 20% went through all the stages. A total of 32 discrepancies were identified and 96.8% of them were resolved. In the third cycle, all patients (n = 30) had the BPMH completed, and 56.6% of patients went through all the stages. Twenty-four discrepancies were identified and resolved. CONCLUSION: The use of the "Model for Improvement" framework effectively contributed to the implementation of the service according to the characteristics of the studied hospital.