Epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon hospital admission in children - a systematic review

Objectives: NICE/NPSA excluded children under 16 from their guidance concerning medicines reconciliation (MR) upon admission.1 Our aims and objectives of conducting the literature review was to identify the epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon admission, transfer and discharge in children, and if they require MR. Method: Six bibliographical databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science and Biosis Previews) and selected key words were used to find epidemiological studies on medication discrepancies in children upon hospital admission, transfer and discharge (key words included ‘medication discrepancy’; ‘medication reconciliation’; ‘hospital admission’; ‘hospital discharge’; ‘hospital transfer’); studies where the data for children could be extracted were included. Results: From the 1239 articles found (in May 2011), eight of the articles had extractable paediatric information, (five from Canada, two from USA, one from UK). Five of the studies involved discrepancies on admission, one involved discrepancies on admission and transfer, one involved discrepancies at transfer and one considered discharge. The reference point used to compare against the admission, transfer and the discharge order differed in each of the studies. Four studies used a rating scale to assess the clinical significance of the discrepancies to demonstrate the potential adverse clinical outcome of patients in the absence of clinical intervention. Two studies2 3 used a rating scale that was used in adults.4 A study of paediatric neurosurgical patients found that initial hospital prescriptions for children differed from the preadmission prescriptions in 39% of occasions and 50% of all prescribing variations had the potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.2 A study by Coffey et al in general paediatric admissions in Canada showed 22% of patients experienced at least one discrepancy and 29% of the discrepancies had the potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.3 By comparison an epidemiological study in discrepancies in adults on admission had 38.6% of the discrepancies identified with a potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.4 All the studies involved small samples or specific patient groups such as medically complex patients. However all of the studies demonstrated that discrepancies occurred among paediatric populations during transitions in care settings and mentioned MR as an intervention. Conclusion: The results have shown that discrepancies of medication upon hospital admission, transfer and discharge occur regularly in children. With only one published study in the UK looking at hospital admission in children, and no published articles on the incidence and epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon hospital transfer or discharge further research is required in a wider paediatric population. Further work is also required to define the required interventions to improve practice.

An evaluation of the epidemiology of medication discrepancies and clinical significance of medicines reconciliation in children admitted to hospital

Aims: To determine the incidence of unintended medication discrepancies in paediatric patients at the time of hospital admission; evaluate the process of medicines reconciliation; assess the benefit of medicines reconciliation in preventing clinical harm. Method: A 5 month prospective multisite study. Pharmacists at four English hospitals conducted admission medicines reconciliation in children using a standardised data collection form. A discrepancy was defined as a difference between the patient's preadmission medication (PAM), compared with the initial admission medication orders written by the hospital doctor. The discrepancies were classified into intentional and unintentional discrepancies. The unintentional discrepancies were assessed for potential clinical harm by a team of healthcare professionals, which included doctors, pharmacists and nurses. Results: Medicines reconciliation was conducted in 244 children admitted to hospital. 45% (109/244) of the children had at least one unintentional medication discrepancy between the PAM and admission medication order. The overall results indicated that 32% (78/244) of patients had at least one clinically significant unintentional medication discrepancy with potential to cause moderate 20% (50/244) or severe 11% (28/244) harm. No single source of information provided all the relevant details of a patient's medication history. Parents/carers provided the most accurate details of a patient's medication history in 81% of cases. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that in the absence of medicines reconciliation, children admitted to hospitals across England are at risk of harm from unintended medication discrepancies at the transition of care from the community to hospital. No single source of information provided a reliable medication history.

Medicines management across the primary-hospital healthcare interface: a study of paediatric patients

A comparison of medicines management documents in use by NHS organisations in the West Midlands confirms that there are important differences between the primary care and hospital sectors in respect to medicines management interface issues. Of these, two aspects important to paediatric patients have been studied. These are the transfer of information as a patient is admitted to hospital, and access to long-term medicines for home-patients. National guidance provided by NICE requires medication reconciliation to be undertaken on admission to hospital for adults. A study of paediatric admissions, reported in this thesis, demonstrates that the clinical importance of this process is at least as important for children as for adults, and challenges current UK guidance. The transfer of essential medication information on hospital admission is central to the medication reconciliation process. Two surveys of PCTs in 2007 and again in 2009 demonstrate that very few PCTs provide guidance to GPs to support this process. Provision of guidance is increasing slowly but remains the exception. The provision of long-term medicines for children at home is hindered by this patient population often needing unlicensed drugs. Further studies demonstrate that primary care processes regularly fail to maintain access to essential drugs and patients and their carers frequently turn to hospitals for help. Surveys of hospital medical staff (single site) and hospital nurses (six UK sites) demonstrates the activity these healthcare workers perform to help children get the medicines they need. A similar survey of why carers turn to a hospital pharmacy department for urgent supplies (usually termed rescue-medicines) adds to the understanding of these problems and supports identifying service changes. A large survey of community pharmacies demonstrates the difficulties they have when dispensing hospital prescriptions and identifies practical solutions. This programme concludes by recommending service changes to support medication management for children.

Exploring the experiences of nurses who care for children who have Acute Life Threatening Events (ALTE) in hospital

This thesis presents a program of work designed to explore and describe what the experience of caring for a child who has an Acute Life Threatening Event (ALTE) is like for the nurses. An ALTE may include a cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest or unplanned admission for a ward to the Paediatric Intensive Care unit. Using the MRC framework for the development of complex interventions, this information was then coupled with theory to develop the PREPARE and SUPPORT interventions. Given the wide-ranging and exploratory nature of this research, a pragmatic, mixed design approach was used to address the aims and objectives of the thesis. The mixed design approach included: a systematic literature review; international survey of practice; interviews with nurses and doctors using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis; development, refinement and evaluation of interventions during a feasibility study. Two studies were identified through the systematic review which aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of debriefing. The studies did not provide evidence to support the use of these interventions within healthcare. The international survey of practice demonstrated hospitals were using interventions to both prepare and support nurses for these events. The preparatory interventions were clinically focused and the majority of the supportive interventions included a debrief. The interventions were not being evaluated for effectiveness. The interviews conducted with nurses and doctors provided insight into what that experience was like for the participants. Using the MRC framework, this evidence was coupled with theory to develop the PREPARE and SUPPORT interventions. A multidisciplinary working party used an iterative process to refine and evaluate the interventions and study procedures were explored through a feasibility study. The pragmatic, mixed design approach demonstrated how the empirical evidence was coupled with theory and clinical expertise to develop interventions for use within the healthcare environment.

Does anticholinergics drug burden relate to global neuro-disability outcome measures and length of hospital stay?

Primary objective: To assess the relationship between disability, length of stay (LOS) and anticholinergic burden (ACB) with people following acquired brain or spinal cord injury. Research design: A retrospective case note review assessed total rehabilitation unit admission. Methods and procedures: Assessment of 52 consecutive patients with acquired brain/spinal injury and neuropathy in an in-patient neuro-rehabilitation unit of a UK university hospital. Data analysed included: Northwick Park Dependency Score (NPDS), Rehabilitation complexity Scale (RCS), Functional Independence Measure and Functional Assessment Measure FIM-FAM (UK version 2.2), LOS and ACB. Outcome was different in RCS, NPDS and FIM-FAM between admission and discharge. Main outcomes and results: A positive change was reported in ACB results in a positive change in NPDS, with no significant effect on FIM-FAM, either Motor or Cognitive, or on the RCS. Change in ACB correlated to the length of hospital stay (regression correlation = −6.64; SE = 3.89). There was a significant harmful impact of increase in ACB score during hospital stay, from low to high ACB on NPDS (OR = 9.65; 95% CI = 1.36–68.64) and FIM-FAM Total scores (OR = 0.03; 95% CI = 0.002–0.35). Conclusions: There was a statistically significant correlation of ACB and neuro-disability measures and LOS amongst this patient cohort.

Clinical significance of medication reconciliation in children admitted to a UK pediatric hospital:observational study of neurosurgical patients

Background: In December 2007, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and the National Patient Safety Agency in the UK (NICE-NPSA) published guidance that recommends all adults admitted to hospital receive medication reconciliation, usually by pharmacy staff. A costing and report tool was provided indicating a resource requirement of d12.9 million for England per year. Pediatric patients are excluded from this guidance. Objective: To determine the clinical significance of medication reconciliation in children on admission to hospital. Methods: A prospective observational study included pediatric patients admitted to a neurosurgical ward at Birmingham Childrens Hospital, Birmingham, England, between September 2006 and March 2007. Medication reconciliation was conducted by a pharmacist after the admission of each of 100 consecutive eligible patients aged 4 months to 16 years. The clinical significance of prescribing disparities between pre-admission medications and initial admission medication orders was determined by an expert multidisciplinary panel and quantified using an analog scale. The main outcome measure was the clinical signficance of unintentional variations between hospital admission medication orders and physician-prescribed pre-admission medication for repeat (continuing) medications. Results: Initial admission medication orders for children differed from prescribed pre-admission medication in 39%of cases. Half of all resulting prescribing variations in this setting had the potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration. These results mirror findings for adults. Conclusions: The introduction of medication reconciliation in children on admission to hospital has the potential to reduce discomfort or clinical deterioration by reducing unintentional changes to repeat prescribed medication. Consequently, there is no justification for the omission of children from the NICENPSA guidance concerning medication reconciliation in hospitals, and costing tools should include pediatric patients. © 2010 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved.

The clinical significance of medicines reconciliation in children admitted to hospital

Aims and Objectives: The NICE/NPSA guidance on Medicines Reconciliation in adults upon hospital admission excludes children under the age of 16.1 Hence the primary aim and objective of this study was to use medicines reconciliation to primarily identify if discrepancies occur upon hospital admission. Secondary objectives were to clinically assess for harm discrepancies that were identified in paediatric patients on long term medications at four hospitals across the UK. Method: Medicines reconciliation is a procedure where the current medication history of a patient prior to hospital admission would be taken and verifying the medication orders made at hospital admission against this history, addressing any discrepancies identified. Medicines reconciliation was carried out prospectively for 244 paediatric patients on chronic medication across four UK hospitals (Birmingham, London, Leeds and North Staffordshire) between January – May 2011. Medicines reconciliation was conducted by a clinical pharmacist using the following sources of information: 1) the patient's Pre-Admission Medication (PAM) from the patient's general practitioner 2) examination of the Patient's Own Medications brought into hospital, 3) a semi-structured interview with the parent-carers and 4) identification of admission medication orders written on the drug chart prior to clinical pharmacy input (Drug Chart). Discrepancies between the PAM and Drug Chart were documented and classified as intentional or unintentional. Intentional discrepancies were defined as changes that were made knowingly by the prescriber and confirmed. Unintentional discrepancies were assessed for clinical significance by an expert panel and assigned a significance score based on the likelihood of causing potential discomfort or clinical deterioration: class 1 unlikely, class 2 moderate and class 3 severe.2 Results: 1004 medication regimens were included from the 244 patients across the four sites. 588 of the 1004 (59%) medicines, had discrepancies between the PAM and Drug Chart; of these 36% (n = 209) were unintentional and included for clinically assessment. 189 drug discrepancies 30% were classified as class 1, 47% were class 2 and 23% were class 3 discrepancies. The remaining 20 discrepancies were cases where deviating from the PAM would have been the right thing to do, which might suggest that an intentional but undocumented discrepancy by the prescriber writing up the admission order may have occurred. Conclusion: The results suggest that medication discrepancies in paediatric patients do occur upon hospital admission, which do have a potential to cause harm and that medicines reconciliation is a potential solution to preventing such discrepancies. References: 1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. National Patient Safety Agency. PSG001. Technical patient safety solutions for medicines reconciliation on admission of adults to hospital. London: NICE; 2007. 2. Cornish, P. L., Knowles, S. R., Marchesano, et al. Unintended Medication Discrepancies at the Time of Hospital Admission. Archives of Internal Medicine 2005; 165:424–429