6 resultados para Medication complexity
em Scielo España
Resumo:
Objectives: To analyze the relationship between pharmacotherapeutical complexity and compliance of therapeutic objectives in HIV+ patients on antiretroviral treatment and concomitant dyslipidemia therapy. Materials and methods: A retrospective observational study including HIV patients on stable antiretroviral treatment during the past 6 months, and dyslipidemia treatment between January and December, 2013. The complexity index was calculated with the tool developed by McDonald et al. Other variables analyzed were: age, gender, risk factor of HIV, smoking, alcoholism and drugs, psychiatric disorders, adherence to antiretroviral treatment and lipid lowering drugs, and clinical parameters (HIV viral load, CD4 count, plasma levels of total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, and triglycerides). In order to determine the predictive factors associated with the compliance of therapeutic objectives, univariate analysis was conducted through logistical regression, followed by a multivariate analysis. Results: The study included 89 patients; 56.8% of them met the therapeutic objectives for dyslipidemia. The complexity index was significantly higher (p = 0.02) in those patients who did not reach the objective values (median 51.8 vs. 38.9). Adherence to lipid lowering treatment was significantly associated with compliance of the therapeutic objectives established for dyslipidemia treatment. A 67.0% of patients met the objectives for their antiretroviral treatment; however, the complexity index was not significantly higher (p = 0.06) in those patients who did not meet said objectives. Conclusions: Pharmacotherapeutical complexity represents a key factor in terms of achieving health objectives in HIV+ patients on treatment for dyslipidemia.
Resumo:
Objective: To explore the effect of patient characteristics and health beliefs on their medication adherence. Methods: Patients (n=167) with chronic conditions (mean age 58.9; SD=13.54, 53% males) were recruited from March 2009- to March 2010 using a cross sectional study design. Data collected included patients’ demographics, medical conditions, medications therapeutic regimen, frequency of physician visits and health beliefs. Patient self-reported adherence to medications was assessed by the researcher using a validated and published scale. Treatment related problems (TRPs) were evaluated for each patient by competent clinical pharmacists. Associations between patient characteristics/health beliefs with adherence were explored. Results: About half of the patients (46.1%) were non-adherent. A significant association was found between lower adherence and higher number of disease states (p<0.001), higher number of medications (p=0.001), and higher number of identified TRPs (p = 0.003). Patient adherence was positively affected by older age, higher educational level, and higher number of physician visits per month, while it was negatively affected by reporting difficulties with getting prescription refills on time. Conclusion: This study identified different factors that may negatively affect adherence, including higher number of medications and disease states, higher number of identified TRPs and inability to getting prescription refills on time. Hence, more care needs to be provided to patients with complex therapeutic regimens in order to enhance adherence.
Resumo:
Background: Non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a widely used therapeutic group in the world, and particularly in the Portuguese population. Objective: To compare NSAID’s use by prescription and self-medication acquisition and to determine the pattern of indication of NSAIDs, their usage profile and possible implications for patients’ safety. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used where individuals presenting at a community pharmacy requesting NSAIDs during the study period (one month) were invited to answer a face-to-face interview where socio-demographic characteristics, the indication pattern and previous experience of side effects were assessed. A follow-up interview was performed one week later to assess the incidence of adverse effects. The study was ethically approved. Results: A sample of 130 NSAIDs users was recruited, comprising mostly women (n=87; 66.9%), actively employed (n=77; 59.2%) and presenting a mean age of 49.5 years old (SD=20.49). An equal proportion of individuals acquired NSAIDs by self-medication and with medical prescription (n=65; 50%). Over 4/5 of patients (n=57; 87.7%) acquiring NSAIDs without a prescription were self-medicated by their own initiative, and only 10.8% (n=7) had been advised by the pharmacist. The most commonly acquired active substances were ibuprofen and diclofenac. Self-medicated users more frequently resorted to topical NSAIDs following short term treatments. The major underlying condition motivating NSAIDs sought were musculoskeletal disorders (45.0%), regardless of the regimen. An important proportion of prevalent users of NSAIDs reported previous experience of adverse effects (11.3%). One week after initiating NSAID therapy, a small proportion of patients reported incidence of adverse effects. Conclusion: Self-medication with NSAIDs is sought for numerous medical conditions. Reported adverse effects (prevalent and incident) confirm the need for a more rational use of NSAIDs and ongoing pharmacovigilance.
Resumo:
Objective: To measure length of hospital stay (LHS) in patients receiving medication reconciliation. Secondary characteristics included analysis of number of preadmission medications, medications prescribed at admission, number of discrepancies, and pharmacists interventions done and accepted by the attending physician. Methods: A 6 month, randomized, controlled trial conducted at a public teaching hospital in southern Brazil. Patients admitted to general wards were randomized to receive usual care or medication reconciliation, performed within the first 72 hours of hospital admission. Results: The randomization process assigned 68 patients to UC and 65 to MR. LHS was 10±15 days in usual care and 9±16 days in medication reconciliation (p=0.620). The total number of discrepancies was 327 in the medication reconciliation group, comprising 52.6% of unintentional discrepancies. Physicians accepted approximately 75.0% of the interventions. Conclusion: These results highlight weakness at patient transition care levels in a public teaching hospital. LHS, the primary outcome, should be further investigated in larger studies. Medication reconciliation was well accepted by physicians and it is a useful tool to find and correct discrepancies, minimizing the risk of adverse drug events and improving patient safety.
Resumo:
Background: It has been estimated that 10,000 patient injuries occur in the US annually due to confusion involving drug names. An unexplored source of patient misunderstandings may be medication salt forms. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess patient knowledge and comprehension regarding the salt forms of medications as a potential source of medication errors. Methods: A 12 item questionnaire which assessed patient knowledge of medication names on prescription labels was administered to a convenience sample of patients presenting to a family practice clinic. Descriptive statistics were calculated and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: There were 308 responses. Overall, 41% of patients agreed they find their medication names confusing. Participants correctly answered to salt form questions between 12.1% and 56.9% of the time. Taking more prescription medications and higher education level were positively associated with providing more correct answers to 3 medication salt form knowledge questions, while age was negatively associated. Conclusions: Patient misconceptions about medication salt forms are common. These findings support recommendations to standardize the inclusion or exclusion of salt forms. Increasing patient education is another possible approach to reducing confusion.
Resumo:
Objective: To analyze pharmaceutical interventions that have been carried out with the support of an automated system for validation of treatments vs. the traditional method without computer support. Method: The automated program, ALTOMEDICAMENTOS® version 0, has 925 052 data with information regarding approximately 20 000 medicines, analyzing doses, administration routes, number of days with such a treatment, dosing in renal and liver failure, interactions control, similar drugs, and enteral medicines. During eight days, in four different hospitals (high complexity with over 1 000 beds, 400-bed intermediate, geriatric and monographic), the same patients and treatments were analyzed using both systems. Results: 3,490 patients were analyzed, with 42 155 different treatments. 238 interventions were performed using the traditional system (interventions 0.56% / possible interventions) vs. 580 (1.38%) with the automated one. Very significant pharmaceutical interventions were 0.14% vs. 0.46%; significant was 0.38% vs. 0.90%; non-significant was 0.05% vs. 0.01%, respectively. If both systems are simultaneously used, interventions are performed in 1.85% vs. 0.56% with just the traditional system. Using only the traditional model, 30.5% of the possible interventions are detected, whereas without manual review and only the automated one, 84% of the possible interventions are detected. Conclusions: The automated system increases pharmaceutical interventions between 2.43 to 3.64 times. According to the results of this study the traditional validation system needs to be revised relying on automated systems. The automated program works correctly in different hospitals.