Calidad de la recogida de la medicación domiciliaria en urgencias: discrepancias en la conciliación / Quality of Home Medication Collection in the Emergency Department: Reconciliation Discrepancies

Introducción El objetivo del estudio fue valorar la calidad de la recogida de información de la medicación domiciliaria en el servicio de Urgencias de un hospital de tercer nivel, e identificar si las posibles deficiencias en esta recogida se tradujeron en errores de conciliación al ingreso, analizar estos y clasificarlos, así como identificar los grupos farmacológicos implicados. Métodos Se realizó un estudio observacional prospectivo en el que se analizó la información farmacoterapéutica recogida en el servicio de Urgencias. Se incluyeron los pacientes que ingresaron en la Unidad de Neumología y de Medicina Interna del Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet de Zaragoza. Se elaboró un listado con la medicación domiciliaria del paciente antes del ingreso, y se valoró si las deficiencias de calidad en la información recogida en urgencias se tradujeron en errores de conciliación al ingreso. Se tuvieron en cuenta las discrepancias no justificadas y se clasificaron siguiendo los criterios del Documento de consenso sobre terminología, clasificación y evaluación de los programas de Conciliación de la Medicación 2009.ResultadosSe incluyeron 136 pacientes, hallando errores de conciliación en el 86,8%. El número total de errores de conciliación encontrados fue 519. Siendo los subtipos más frecuentes: omisión de algún medicamento, falta de dosis y falta de frecuencia de administración. Cerca de un 40% de los errores de conciliación encontrados en el servicio de Medicina Interna no fueron resueltos, el doble de los encontrados en el servicio de Neumología. El grupo farmacológico en el que se encontraron más discrepancias fue el de aparato digestivo y metabolismo, con un 24%.ConclusionesEl porcentaje de pacientes con errores de conciliación es elevado (86%), observándose una importante oportunidad de mejora al ingreso de los pacientes en el servicio de Urgencias (AU)

Introduction The objective of the study was to assess home medication data collected at the emergency department in a tertiary hospital. It also aimed to identify whether any possible deficiencies in this collection were translated as reconciliation errors on admission, to analyse and classify these data and identify the pharmacological groups involved. Methods A prospective observational study was carried out which analysed the pharmacotherapeutic data collected at the emergency department. Patients who were admitted to the Pneumology and Internal Medicine wards at the Miguel Servet University Hospital in Zaragoza were included. A list of the home drugs taken before the hospital stay was compiled, assessing whether the quality deficiencies in data collected in the emergency department translated as reconciliation errors at admission. Unjustified discrepancies were considered and classified in line with the criteria of the consensus document on terminology, classification and assessment of the drug reconciliation programmes for 2009.ResultsWe included 136 patients, finding reconciliation errors in 86.8%. The total number of reconciliation errors found was 519. The most frequent types were: omitting a drug, missing dose information, missing administration frequency information. Almost 40% of the reconciliation errors found in the Internal Medicine ward were not resolved, which was double to that of the Pneumology ward. Most discrepancies were found for the Digestive System and Metabolism group (24%).Conclusions The percentage of patients that experienced reconciliation errors was high (86%), observing an important opportunity to improve at patient admission to the emergency department (AU)

[Quality of home medication collection in the Emergency Department: reconciliation discrepancies]. / Calidad de la recogida de la medicación domiciliaria en urgencias: discrepancias en la conciliación.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of the study was to assess home medication data collected at the Emergency Department in a tertiary hospital. It also aimed to identify whether any possible deficiencies in this collection were translated as reconciliation errors on admission, to analyse and classify these data and identify the pharmacological groups involved. METHOD: A prospective observational study was carried out which analysed the pharmacotherapeutic data collected at the Emergency Department. Patients who were admitted to the Pneumology and Internal Medicine wards at the Miguel Servet University Hospital in Zaragoza were included. A list of the home drugs taken before the hospital stay was compiled, assessing whether the quality deficiencies in data collected in the emergency department translated as reconciliation errors at admission. Unjustified discrepancies were considered and classified in line with the criteria of the consensus document on terminology, classification and assessment of the drug reconciliation programmes for 2009. RESULTS: We included 136 patients, finding reconciliation errors in 86.8%. The total number of reconciliation errors found was 519. The most frequent types were: omitting a drug, missing dose information, missing administration frequency information. Almost 40% of the reconciliation errors found in the Internal Medicine ward were not resolved, which was double that of the Pneumology ward. Most discrepancies were found for the Digestive System and Metabolism group (24%). CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of patients that experienced reconciliation errors was high (86%), observing an important opportunity to improve at patient admission to the Emergency Department.

Variability in the prescription of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To estimate the prevalence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) treatment in Aragon (Spain), analyzing differences according to age, gender and health area. METHODS: Retrospective study on AD treatment prevalence of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine during 2005, using pharmaco-epidemiological data from prescription refunds transferred monthly from pharmacies to the Health Care Service. RESULTS: Differences between health areas were considerable, with adjusted prescription rates between 121.6 and 248.6/100,000 individuals. Treatment rates for women doubled those of men in each health area. Variability was greater among men than women. Drug prescription distribution was also different between health areas. CONCLUSION: Considerable variability in AD treatment has been detected. More consensus is needed to reduce variability in order to improve the quality of the pharmacotherapy for AD and assure equal treatment opportunities for every patient.

Utilización de fármacos específicos para la enfermedad de Alzheimer / Use of specific drugs for Alzheimer's disease

Objetivo. Analizar la evolución y repercusiones económicas del consumo de fármacos específicos para la enfermedad de Alzheimer (EA) en Aragón, conocer su patrón de utilización y estimar la proporción de pacientes en tratamiento específico. Métodos. Estudio descriptivo del consumo extrahospitalario de inhibidores de colinesterasa y memantina (1996-2004) a través de los envases facturados por oficinas de farmacia al Sistema Nacional de Salud. A partir de las dosis diarias definidas (DDD) e importe se calcularon: DDD por cada 1.000 habitantes (DHD), DDD por cada 1.000 habitantes mayores de 64 años (DHD65), incremento primer-último año (%), consumo proporcional por fármaco, coste por habitante y año y coste-tratamiento- día (CTD). Para la estimar la proporción de pacientes tratados se compararon las DHD65 con la prevalencia de EA. Resultados. Las DHD del conjunto han evolucionado de 0,026 (1996) a 3,235 (2004). El donepezilo se consolida como el más prescrito, aunque su peso disminuye ante la rápida penetración de nuevas alternativas. Las DHD consumidas en 2004 supusieron un coste cercano a 6 millones de euros. El CTD disminuyó un 30% en el período estudiado, mientras que el coste total se multiplicó por 90 (por 60 cuando se utilizaron euros constantes de 2004). Se estima que en 2004 el 34% de pacientes con EA recibió tratamiento específico. Conclusiones. Se observa un importante ascenso en el uso y la carga económica que suponen estos fármacos, cuyo coste-efectividad ha sido discutido en algunos estudios. Son necesarios trabajos con datos más específicos por paciente que permitan identificar sus características y valorar la adecuación de los tratamientos

Objetive. To evaluate the consumption evolution and financial impact of specific treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD) in Aragon (Spain), analyzing consumption patterns and trends, and to estimate the proportion of AD patients treated with these drugs. Methods. Descriptive study of outpatient utilization of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine (1996-2004), obtained from the drug packages dispensed by community pharmacists through prescriptions charged to the National Health Service. According to the defined daily doses (DDD) and expenditure data available, data were expressed in DDD per 1,000 inhabitants per day (DHD), DDD per 1,000 inhabitants older than 64 (DHD65), firstlast year increase (%), drug consumption pattern, annual cost per inhabitant and daily treatment cost (DTC). To estimate the proportion of treated patients we compared the DHD65 data with the estimated AD prevalence. Results. Overall consumption of these drugs has increased from 0.026 DHD (1996) to 3.235 DHD (2004). Donepezil remains as the most prescribed, though it is proportionally decreasing as a result of the quick introduction of newer alternatives. Overall cost of the DHD dispensed in 2004 reached nearly 6 million euros. DTC decreased about 30% over the study period, but the total cost increased ninety-fold (sixty-fold when non-variable euros from 2004 were considered). According to our estimates, 34 % of people with AD were receiving specific treatment. Conclusions. There is a significant increase in the consumption and economical burden of these drugs, whose cost-effectiveness has been questioned in some studies. More studies including specific patient data are needed in order to identify individual characteristics and evaluate treatment appropriateness

[Use of specific drugs for Alzheimer's disease]. / Utilización de fármacos específicos para la enfermedad de Alzheimer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the consumption evolution and financial impact of specific treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD) in Aragon (Spain), analyzing consumption patterns and trends, and to estimate the proportion of AD patients treated with these drugs. METHODS: Descriptive study of outpatient utilization of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine (1996-2004), obtained from the drug packages dispensed by community pharmacists through prescriptions charged to the National Health Service. According to the defined daily doses (DDD) and expenditure data available, data were expressed in DDD per 1,000 inhabitants per day (DHD), DDD per 1,000 inhabitants older than 64 (DHD65), first-last year increase (%), drug consumption pattern, annual cost per inhabitant and daily treatment cost (DTC). To estimate the proportion of treated patients we compared the DHD65 data with the estimated AD prevalence. RESULTS: Overall consumption of these drugs has increased from 0.026 DHD (1996) to 3.235 DHD (2004). Donepezil remains as the most prescribed, though it is proportionally decreasing as a result of the quick introduction of newer alternatives. Overall cost of the DHD dispensed in 2004 reached nearly 6 million euros. DTC decreased about 30% over the study period, but the total cost increased ninety-fold (sixty-fold when non-variable euros from 2004 were considered). According to our estimates, 34% of people with AD were receiving specific treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant increase in the consumption and economical burden of these drugs, whose cost-effectiveness has been questioned in some studies. More studies including specific patient data are needed in order to identify individual characteristics and evaluate treatment appropriateness.

Réplica / Reply

No disponible

[Cross-hypersensitivity syndrome between antiepileptic drugs: report of a case]. / Síndrome de hipersensibilidad cruzado entre antiepilépticos: a propósito de un caso.

Antiepileptic hypersensitivity syndrome (SHA) is a rare (1/1.000 to 1/10.000 in new exposures) but potentially life-threatening syndrome that occurs after exposure to an anticonvulsant, most commonly the aromatic ones such as phenytoin, carbamazepine or phenobarbital. Clinical features of this syndrome include cutaneous reactions, fever, lymphadenopaties, eosinophilia and internal organ involvement (mainly liver, but also kidney, CNS, heart or lung). We present a case report of a 61-year-old woman treated with phenobarbital who developed a cutaneous eruption attributed to this drug. Treatment was changed to phenytoin and after 17 days the patient developed cutaneous rash, eosinophilia and an increase in transaminase levels. The high rate of cross-sensitivity between aromatic anticonvulsants (40-80%) suggests a link between a hypersensitivity reaction to phenytoin and the previous reaction to phenobarbital.

[Assessing the use of low-molecular-weight heparins fo venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in internal medicine patients]. / Evaluación de la utilización de heparinas de bajo peso molecular como profilaxis de tromboembolismo venoso en pacientes de medicina interna.

BACKGROUND: Sufficient evidence exists to recommend routine thromboembolic disease prophylaxis for medical inpatients with risk factors --with low-molecular-weight-- heparins being (LMWH) the most suitable treatment option. The objective is to determine the thromboembolic risk level of Internal Medicine patients with LMWH prophylaxis, prescription habits and their adequacy to hospital's standards, as well as prevalence of non-treated patients at risk. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Descriptive and prospective study of internal medicine patients for 2 months. Patients with prophylactic LMWH prescription were chosen, and their thromboembolic risk level and suitable LMWH dose was determined according to the hospital's "thromboembolic disease prevention standards". On the other hand, patients with no LMWH prophylaxis were analysed in order to judge their candidacy. RESULTS: 30% of patients had a prophylactical LMWH prescription, with 43.5% of these prescriptions being adequate to the risk level. The main risk factors were: age, bed-stay, hypertension, cardiopathy with risk factors, diabetes mellitus, dislipemias and COPD. Chi2(0.05) test between risk level and prescribed LMWH revealed no association. 72% of patients without LMWH prescription had a moderate or high risk level. CONCLUSIONS: 1. A high proportion of the patients studied have a considerable thromboembolic risk level. 2. There is not a statistical relationship between thromboembolic risk level and LMWH prescription. 3. There is a high percentage of patients with no LMWH prophylaxis which could be eligible for it. 4. A pharmaceutical intervention would be useful to approach pharmacological prophylaxis to each patient's risk.