RESUMO
Background and objectives: High-quality documentation is critical in medical settings for providing safe patient care. This study was done with the objective of assessing the standard of medical records in anticoagulation clinics and investigating the distinctions between notes written by pharmacists and physicians. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of data from electronic health records (EHRs) was performed on patients who received anticoagulation and were observed at anticoagulation clinics from October to December 2020. Patients were monitored in two anticoagulation clinics, one administered by pharmacists and the other by physicians. The quality of the documentation was assessed using a score, and the note was assigned one of five categories according to its score: very good, good, average, poor, and very poor. The data was analyzed using Stata/SE 13.1. P value<0.05 was considered significant in all analytical tests. Results: A total of 331 patients were included. While 160 patients (48.3%) were followed by the physician-led clinic, 171 (51.6%) were by the pharmacist-led clinic. The average age of the patients was 54 ± 15. 60.73% of them were female, and 90.3% of them were Saudi nationals. Warfarin was the most widely used anticoagulant (70%), followed by rivaroxaban (15.7%). Compared to physicians, pharmacists demonstrated very strong documentation (54% vs. 18%). The examination of the variables considered in the study revealed that physicians had significantly less drug-drug interaction documentation (17 vs. 71 times) or drug-food interaction documentation (23 vs. 71 times) than pharmacists. In terms of follow-up frequency, pharmacists were found to adhere to the clinic protocol (150 times) more frequently than physicians (104 times). However, there was no significant difference in therapeutic plan documentation between the two groups. (p = 0.416). Conclusion: Pharmacists were more comprehensive in their documentation than physicians in anticoagulation clinics. Unified clinic documentation can ensure consistent documentation within EHRs across all disciplines.
RESUMO
Background and objective: The primary function of the Drug Information Center (DIC) is to provide drug-related information to healthcare professionals. The purpose of this research was to assess the use of drug information centers by health care the professionals to improve medication safety in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A retrospective study was carried out at King Khalid University Hospital's drug and poison information center (DPIC). During the study period, requests received by drug information specialists were saved in the DPIC questions' bank. Patients' demographic, type of drug information request, caller information, number of references used, medications, class of medication, medication error type and subclass were assessed and analyzed using descriptive analysis. Medication error types were captured based on nature of questions. Results: A total of 243 drug information inquiries were assessed. Most of the inquiries were about adult population (n = 168; 69.1%). Most drug information inquiries were received from pharmacists (n = 117; 48.1%), followed by physicians (n = 94; 38.7%), then nurses (n = 23; 9.5%). Prescribing error were the most type of medication error prevented by drug information specialists (n = 214; 88.1%) followed by dispensing errors (n = 11; 4.5%). Approximately half of the medication errors in this study were near-misses (n = 110; 45.3%), followed by potential near misses (n = 84; 34.6%). Only, (n = 49; 20.2%) were identified as errors. Conclusion: This study highlights the role of drug information specialists in providing evidence-based information and helps in preventing possible medication errors which will enhance the safety of the services provided to the patients.