Identificação de riscos e práticas na utilização de medicamentos potencialmente perigosos em hospital universitário / Identificación de riesgos y prácticas en el uso de medicamentos potencialmente peligrosos en un hospital universitario / Identification of risks and practices in the use of high alert medications in a university hospital

RESUMO Objetivo: analisar as prescrições de medicamentos potencialmente perigosos e identificar as práticas adotadas na dispensação em hospital universitário público de alta complexidade, propondo estratégias para prevenção de eventos adversos. Métodos: estudo transversal realizado com 566 prescrições, em três turnos, no período de abril a dezembro de 2016. A identificação de práticas para dispensação foi por observação direta com aplicação de checklist baseado no protocolo do Ministério da Saúde (MS) /Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). Utilizou-se teste não paramétrico do qui-quadrado de independência para avaliar a associação entre prescrições com e sem medicamentos potencialmente perigosos e unidades de internação. Resultados: mais da metade das prescrições (56,6%) continha dois ou mais medicamentos potencialmente perigosos e quase todos injetáveis (95,4%), principalmente analgésicos opioides (31,2%), glicose 50% (24,7%) e insulina NPH e regular (24,3%). A taxa dos prescritos correspondeu a 18,2%. As principais práticas que representaram riscos foram: distribuição coletiva de cloreto de potássio e insulina; falta de etiquetas de alerta; dupla conferência inexistente; uso de fontes de interrupção/distração em 43,9% das prescrições atendidas. Conclusão: apesar de serem frequentes em mais da metade das prescrições, as práticas adotadas na dispensação de medicamentos potencialmente perigosos foram insuficientes para uma dispensação segura, podendo comprometer a administração desses medicamentos e causar danos aos pacientes. É importante a implementação do protocolo do MS/ANVISA para prevenção de erros de medicação, em consonância com o terceiro desafio global da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS).

RESUMEN Objetivo: analizar las prescripciones de medicamentos potencialmente peligrosos e identificar las prácticas adoptadas en la dispensación en un hospital universitario público de alta complejidad, proponiendo estrategias para prevenir eventos adversos. Métodos: estudio transversal realizado con 566 prescripciones, en tres turnos, de abril a diciembre de 2016. La identificación de prácticas de dispensación se realizó mediante observación directa con aplicación de una lista de verificación basada en el protocolo del Ministerio de Salud (MS) / Agencia Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria (ANVISA). Se utilizó una prueba de independencia chi-cuadrado no paramétrica para evaluar la asociación entre las prescripciones con y sin medicamentos potencialmente peligrosos con unidades de hospitalización. Resultados: más de la mitad de las prescripciones (56.6%) contenían dos o más fármacos potencialmente peligrosos , la mayoría inyectables (95.4%), principalmente analgésicos opioides (31.2%), glucosa 50% (24.7%) e insulina NPH y regular (24.3%). La tasa de prescripción correspondió al 18,2%. Las principales prácticas que representaban riesgos fueron: distribución colectiva de cloruro de potasio e insulina; falta de etiquetas de advertencia; falta de doble verificación; uso de fuentes de interrupción / distracción en el 43,9% de las prescripciones atendidas. Conclusión: a pesar de ser frecuente en más de la mitad de las prescripciones, las prácticas adoptadas en la dispensación de fármacos potencialmente peligrosos fueron insuficientes para la dispensación segura, lo que podría comprometer la administración de estos medicamentos y perjudicar a los pacientes. Es importante implementar el protocolo MS/ANVISA para prevenir errores de medicación, en línea con el tercer desafío global de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS).

ABSTRACT Objective: to analyze the prescriptions of high alert medications and to identify the practices adopted in the dispensing in a high complexity public university hospital, proposing strategies to prevent adverse events. Methods: a cross-sectional study carried out with 566 prescriptions, in three shifts, from April to December 2016. The identification of practices for dispensing was by direct observation with the application of a checklist based on the protocol of the Ministry of Health (MH)/National Health Surveillance Agency(ANVISA) (Ministério da Saúde/Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária). A non-parametric chi-square test of independence was used to assess the association between prescriptions with and without high alert medications and inpatient units. Results: more than half of the prescriptions (56.6%) contained two or more high alert medications and almost all were injectable (95.4%), mainly opioid analgesics (31.2%), glucose 50% (24.7%), and NPH and regular insulin (24.3%). The prescription rate corresponded to 18.2%. The main practices that represented risks were the following: collective distribution of potassium chloride and insulin; lack of warning labels; non-existent double check; presence of interruption/distraction sources in 43.9% of the prescriptions met. Conclusion: despite being frequent in more than half of the prescriptions, the practices adopted in the dispensing of high alert medications were insufficient for a safe dispensing, which could compromise the administration of these drugs and cause harm to the patients. It is important to implement the MH/ANVISA protocol for preventing medication errors, in consonance with the third global challenge of the World Health Organization (WHO).

Prevalência de medicamentos potencialmente inapropriados a idosos na relação municipal de medicamentos essenciais de Porto Alegre / Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications for the elderly in the municipal list of essential medicines in Porto Alegre

Objetivo: Verificar a prevalência de Medicamentos Potencialmente Inapropriados (MPIs) a idosos na Relação Municipal de Medicamentos Essenciais (REMUME) do município de Porto Alegre (POA) através da aplicação de critérios explícitos. Método: Foi realizado um estudo transversal através da avaliação dos medicamentos contidosna REMUME de POA. A coleta dos dados foi realizada online na página da Secretaria Municipal de Saúde (SMS-POA). Por meio da aplicação dos Critérios de Beers 2019, TheEuropean Union (EU)(7) ­ List of Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIM) e a Lista de Ingredientes Farmacéuticos Activos Potencialmente Inapropriados em Adultos Mayores(IFAsPIAM) foram identificados os MPIs a idosos e verificada a prevalência desses na REMUME. Os MPIs foram classificados de acordo com a classificação Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC). Resultados: Foram identificados 33 MPIs na REMUME de Porto Alegre, sendo 9 medicamentos comuns entre os três critérios utilizados. Esses medicamentos atuam, na maioria, no sistema nervoso, seguido por aparelho digestivo e metabolismo e sistema cardiovascular. A prevalência de MPIs a idosos de acordo com o Critérios de Beers 2019, o (EU) (7) ­ (PIM) e a Lista IFAsPIAM foi de, respectivamente, 22 (23,4%), 19 (19,6%) e 23 (23,7%) MPI a idosos. Conclusão: MPIs estão presentes na REMUME de Porto Alegre. A identificação de MPIs a idosos é de grande relevância clínica e uma importante estratégia de saúde pública que tem como objetivo melhorar a seleção dos medicamentos, orientar profissionais e pacientes e, principalmente, reduzir eventos adversos a medicamentos. (AU)

Patient- and health care-related factors associated with initiation of potentially inappropriate medication in community-dwelling older persons.

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in older persons are defined as medications of which the potential harms outweigh their benefits. The purpose of this study was to determine how initiation of PIMs accumulate in community-dwelling persons aged 65-74 and ≥75 years, and which patient- and health care-related factors are associated with PIM initiation over time. Data of this study were gathered from population-based registers by a 10% random sample of persons (n = 28 497) aged ≥65 years with no prior PIMs within a 2-year period preceding the index date (1 January 2002), and the study individuals were followed until 2013. The Finnish Prescription Register was linked using a personal identity code to register on inpatient care and causes of deaths and socio-economic data. In this study, 10 698 (37.5%) persons initiated PIMs during the study period. Female gender was associated with PIM initiation in 65-74-year-olds, but not in ≥75-year-olds. In 65-74-year-olds, the risk of PIM initiation increased with the higher income, whereas in ≥75-year-olds, the association between PIM initiation and the high income was not significant. The prescribing physician explained 9%-16% of the variation in the probability of PIM initiation. In conclusion, there were age-related differences in the factors associated with PIM initiation in relation to gender and socio-economic status. Overall, patient-related factors explained a large proportion of variation of PIM initiation, but there were also differences in PIM prescribing among physicians. However, physician-related variance of PIM initiations decreased during the 12-year follow-up.

Study protocol for a single-centre, prospective, non-blinded, randomised, 12-month, parallel-group superiority study to compare the efficacy of pharmacist intervention versus usual care for elderly patients hospitalised in orthopaedic wards.

INTRODUCTION: Given that polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing are common in elderly orthopaedic patients, pharmacist interventions to improve medication practices among this population are important. However, past studies have reported mixed results regarding the effectiveness of pharmacist-led interventions in inpatient elderly care. Furthermore, few randomised controlled trials have evaluated patient-relevant outcomes as a primary endpoint. Therefore, we will evaluate whether a pharmacist-led intervention could reduce readmission of hospitalised elderly orthopaedic patients with polypharmacy or potentially inappropriate prescribing. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an ongoing single-centre, prospective, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial designed to evaluate the superiority of a pharmacist-led intervention for hospitalised elderly patients compared with usual care. The trial will include newly admitted orthopaedic patients 70 years of age and older with polypharmacy or at least one potentially inappropriate prescription, as identified by the screening tool of older people's prescriptions (STOPP) criteria. Usual care includes medication reconciliation, patient education and monitoring, as well as providing information about discharge medications. Pharmacist interventions, in addition to usual care, include advising the patient's physician to stop unnecessary or inappropriate medications and start necessary medications. The primary outcome is the 1-year readmission rate. Secondary outcomes are the proportion of patients who undergo emergency department visits and the occurrences of all-cause death, a new fracture, myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke. The study started in November 2017, and up to approximately 220 patients will be enrolled. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the National Hospital Organization Tochigi Medical Center (No. 29-22). The trial was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) clinical registry. The results of this trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000029404.

Prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in a subpopulation of older European clinical trial participants: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate and compare the prevalence and type of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) among community-dwelling older adults (≥65 years) enrolled to a clinical trial in three European countries. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of the Thyroid Hormone Replacement for Subclinical Hypothyroidism Trial dataset. PARTICIPANTS: A subset of 48/80 PIP and 22/34 PPOs indicators from the Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) V2 criteria were applied to prescribed medication data for 532/737 trial participants in Ireland, Switzerland and the Netherlands. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of PIP was lower in the Irish participants (8.7%) compared with the Swiss (16.7%) and Dutch (12.5%) participants (P=0.15) and was not statistically significant. The overall prevalence of PPOs was approximately one-quarter in the Swiss (25.3%) and Dutch (24%) participants and lower in the Irish (14%) participants (P=0.04) and the difference was statistically significant. The hypnotic Z-drugs were the most frequent PIP in Irish participants, (3.5%, n=4), while it was non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and oral anticoagulant combination, sulfonylureas with a long duration of action, and benzodiazepines (all 4.3%, n=7) in Swiss, and benzodiazepines (7.1%, n=18) in Dutch participants. The most frequent PPOs in Irish participants were vitamin D and calcium in osteoporosis (3.5%, n=4). In the Swiss and Dutch participants, they were bone antiresorptive/anabolic therapy in osteoporosis (9.9%, n=16, 8.6%, n=22) respectively. The odds of any PIP after adjusting for age, sex, multimorbidity and polypharmacy were (adjusted OR (aOR)) 3.04 (95% CI 1.33 to 6.95, P<0.01) for Swiss participants and aOR 1.74 (95% CI 0.79 to 3.85, P=0.17) for Dutch participants compared with Irish participants. The odds of any PPOs were aOR 2.48 (95% CI 1.27 to 4.85, P<0.01) for Swiss participants and aOR 2.10 (95% CI 1.11 to 3.96, P=0.02) for Dutch participants compared with Irish participants. CONCLUSIONS: This study has estimated and compared the prevalence and type of PIP and PPOs among this cohort of community-dwelling older people. It demonstrated a significant difference in the prevalence of PPOs between the three populations. Further research is urgently needed into the impact of system level factors as this has important implications for patient safety, healthcare provision and economic costs.

Using two tools to identify Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIM) in elderly patients in Southern Chile.

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the prevalence of prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) identified using the Beers and STOPP criteria; and to determine the clinical variables related with the prescription of PIMs in older adults. METHODS: An observational study of 250 patients aged 65 years or older was conducted in a large teaching hospital. Beers (2012) and STOPP (2008) criteria were utilized to identify PIMs. Data on age, sex, admission and discharge dates, diagnoses, and medications prescribed were obtained from medical records. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine patient variables related with the prescription of PIMs. KEY FINDINGS: Using Beers criteria, 375 PIMs were identified in 198 patients. 32% of these patients were prescribed one PIM, 20% were prescribed two PIMs, and 48% were prescribed more than two PIMs. Using STOPP criteria, 148 PIMs were identified in 120 patients. 41% of these patients were prescribed one PIM, 51% were prescribed two PIMs, and 8% were prescribed more than two PIMs. An association between PIM prescribing and polypharmacy was detected with both criteria. After adjusting for confounding variables, the prescription of Beers-identified PIMs was significantly associated with patients older than 80 (OR: 2.99; 95% CI: 1.13-7.89) and with length of hospital stay of more than 15days (OR: 2.78; 95% CI: 1.20-6.44). CONCLUSION: These two criteria showed that the prescription of PIMs is prevalent in hospitalized elderly patients. It may be beneficial to educate healthcare teams about these criteria to reduce the prescription of PIMs.