306 resultados para INAPPROPRIATE MEDICATION USE
Resumo:
Objective: To develop a 'quality use of medicines' coding system for the assessment of pharmacists' medication reviews and to apply it to an appropriate cohort. Method: A 'quality use of medicines' coding system was developed based on findings in the literature. These codes were then applied to 216 (111 intervention, 105 control) veterans' medication profiles by an independent clinical pharmacist who was supported by a clinical pharmacologist with the aim to assess the appropriateness of pharmacy interventions. The profiles were provided for veterans participating in a randomised, controlled trial in private hospitals evaluating the effect of medication review and discharge counselling. The reliability of the coding was tested by two independent clinical pharmacists in a random sample of 23 veterans from the study population. Main outcome measure: Interrater reliability was assessed by applying Cohen's kappa score on aggregated codes. Results: The coding system based on the literature consisted of 19 codes. The results from the three clinical pharmacists suggested that the original coding system had two major problems: (a) a lack of discrimination for certain recommendations e. g. adverse drug reactions, toxicity and mortality may be seen as variations in degree of a single effect and (b) certain codes e. g. essential therapy were in low prevalence. The interrater reliability for an aggregation of all codes into positive, negative and clinically non-significant codes ranged from 0.49-0.58 (good to fair). The interrater reliability increased to 0.72-0.79 (excellent) when all negative codes were excluded. Analysis of the sample of 216 profiles showed that the most prevalent recommendations from the clinical pharmacists were a positive impact in reducing adverse responses (31.9%), an improvement in good clinical pharmacy practice (25.5%) and a positive impact in reducing drug toxicity (11.1%). Most medications were assigned the clinically non-significant code (96.6%). In fact, the interventions led to a statistically significant difference in pharmacist recommendations in the categories; adverse response, toxicity and good clinical pharmacy practice measured by the quality use of medicine coding system. Conclusion: It was possible to use the quality use of medicine coding system to rate the quality and potential health impact of pharmacists' medication reviews, and the system did pick up differences between intervention and control patients. The interrater reliability for the summarised coding system was fair, but a larger sample of medication regimens is needed to assess the non-summarised quality use of medicines coding system.
Resumo:
Smoking rate is disproportionately high among patients with schizophrenia, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. However, cigarette smoking has been reported to have beneficial effects on negative symptoms, extrapyramidal symptoms, cognitive functioning and mood symptoms. Therefore, smoking cessation may worsen disability in schizophrenia. The association between smoking and these key clinical parameters was examined. Additionally, severity of smoking across four different antipsychotic treatment groups was explored. One hundred and forty-six patients with schizophrenia were assessed for smoking using expired carbon monoxide and smoking history. They were administered the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale, The Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale, the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale, Reitans Trail-making Test (A and B) and General Health Questionnaire-28. There was no difference in the chlorpromazine equivalent dose of any of the medications studied. Atypical agents were associated with significantly lower levels of smoking when compared with typical medications. There was no difference in smoking severity between the individual atypical medications examined. Similarly, there were no significant differences between smoking and non-smoking groups with regard to Positive and Negative Symptom Scale, Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale, Trail-making Test and General Health Questionnaire-28. However, there was a significant difference between these groups with the smoking group demonstrating less akathisia. Smoking is not associated with positive, negative cognitive and mood symptoms in schizophrenia. Smoking is associated with lower levels of antipsychotic induced akathisia. Clinicians should not be discouraged from helping patients stop smoking for fear of worsening symptoms. However, akathisia may emerge upon cessation of smoking. Switching patients from typical to atypical antipsychotics may assist patients with schizophrenia to give up smoking.
Resumo:
This paper reviews evidence on two hypotheses about the relationship between cannabis use and psychosis. The first hypothesis is that heavy cannabis use may cause a cannabis psychosis-a psychosis that would not occur in the absence of cannabis use, the symptoms of which are preceded by heavy cannabis use and remit after abstinence. The second hypothesis is that cannabis use may precipitate schizophrenia, or exacerbate its symptoms. Evaluation of these hypotheses requires evidence of an association between cannabis use and psychosis, that is unlikely to be due to chance, in which cannabis use precedes psychosis, and in which we can exclude the hypothesis that the relationship is due to other factors, such as other drug use, or a personal vulnerability to psychosis. There is some clinical support for the first hypothesis. If these disorders exist they seem to be rare, because they require very high doses of THC, the prolonged use of highly potent forms of cannabis, or a pre-existing (but as yet unspecified) vulnerability. There is more support for the second hypothesis, in that a large prospective study has shown a linear relationship between the frequency with which cannabis has been used by age 18 and the risks over the subsequent 15 years of a diagnosis of schizophrenia. It is still unclear whether this means that cannabis use precipitates schizophrenia, whether it is a form of self-medication, or whether the association is due to the use of other drugs, such as amphetamines, which heavy cannabis users are more Likely to use. There is stronger evidence that cannabis use can exacerbate the symptoms of schizophrenia. Mental health services should identify patients with schizophrenia who use alcohol, cannabis and other drugs and advise them to abstain or to greatly reduce their drug use.
Resumo:
Objective: This paper evaluates evidence for two hypotheses about the relationship between cannabis use and psychosis: (i) that heavy cannabis use causes a 'cannabis psychosis', i.e, a psychotic disorder that would not have occurred in the absence of cannabis use and which can be recognised by its pattern of symptoms and their relationship to cannabis use; and (ii) that cannabis use may precipitate schizophrenia, or exacerbate its symptoms. Method: Literature relevant to drug use and schizophrenia is reviewed. Results: There is limited clinical evidence for the first hypothesis. If 'cannabis psychoses' exist, they seem to be rare, because they require very high doses of tetrahydrocannabinol, the prolonged use of highly potent forms of cannabis, or a preexisting (but as yet unspecified) vulnerability, or both. There is more support for the second hypothesis in that a large prospective study has shown a linear relationship between the frequency with which cannabis had been used by age 18 and the risk over the subsequent 15 years of receiving a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Conclusions: It is still unclear whether this means that cannabis use precipitates schizophrenia, whether cannabis use is a form of 'self-medication', or whether the association is due to the use of other drugs, such as amphetamines, which heavy cannabis users are more likely to use. There is better clinical and epidemiological evidence that cannabis use can exacerbate the symptoms of schizophrenia.
Resumo:
Background An increased risk of choking associated with antipsychotic medication has been repeatedly postulated. Aims To examine this association in a large number of cases of choking deaths. Method Cases of individuals who had died because of choking were linked with a case register recording contacts with public mental health services. The actual and expected rates of psychiatric disorder and the presence of psychotropic medication in post-mortem blood samples were compared. Results The 70 people who had choked to death were over 20 times more likely to have been treated previously for schizophrenia. They were also more likely to have had a prior organic psychiatric syndrome. The risk for those receiving thioridazine or lithium was. respectively, 92 times and 30 times greater than expected. Other antipsychotic and psychotropic drugs were not over-represented. Conclusions The increased risk of death in people with schizophrenia may be a combination of inherent predispositions and the use of specific antipsychotic drugs. The increased risk of choking in those with organic psychiatric syndromes is consistent with the consequences of compromised neurological competence. Declaration of interest None.
Resumo:
Objective: To assess the appropriateness of ipratropium bromide prescribing in two tertiary referral hospitals. Method: Criteria for optimal use were developed based on current literature and modified after consultation with respiratory physicians and clinical pharmacists. A prospective review of prescribing was performed over a 2-month period to assess conformity to these criteria. Results: Information was collected from 84 patients; 5% were receiving inhalers and 96% nebuliser therapy (one patient used both). 77% of patients (n = 65) had a principal diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 14% (n = 12) asthma and 8% (n = 7) had neither diagnosis. 75% of patients were using ipratropium outside the guidelines. The major areas where the guidelines were not met were a lack of therapeutic justification, use of inappropriate doses, and use of an inappropriate delivery device. Feedback and educational interventions were designed and delivered based on the data obtained. Conclusions: There was widespread use of ipratropium outside the developed guidelines. Interventions in specific areas could lead to significant improvements in the use of this high cost drug
Resumo:
Objective: Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) has been effectively used in the treatment of alcohol dependence. Clinical studies report that the anticraving drug naltrexone, is a useful adjunct to treatment. Currently, few data are available on the impact of adding this medication to programmes in more typical, outpatient, and rehabilitation settings. The objective of this study was to examine the impact on outcome of adding naltrexone to an established outpatient alcohol rehabilitation program which employed CBT. Method: Fifty patients participated in an established 12-week, outpatient, 'contract'-based alcohol abstinence programme which employed CBT. They also received naltrexone 50 mg orally daily (CBT + naltrexone). Outcomes were compared with 50 historical, matched controls, all of whom participated in the same programme without an anticraving medication (CBT alone). All patients met DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence. Results: Programme attendance across the eight treatment sessions was lower in the CBT alone group (p < 0.001). Relapse to alcohol use occurred sooner and more frequently in the CBT alone group (p < 0.001). Rehabilitation programme completion at 12 weeks was 88% (CBT + naltrexone) compared with 36% for (CBT alone) (p < 0.001). Alcohol abstinence at 12 weeks was 76% (CBT + naltrexone) compared with 18% (CBT alone) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: When employing the same outpatient rehabilitation programme and comparing outcomes using matched historical controls, the addition of naltrexone substantially improves programme attendance, programme completion and reported alcohol abstinence. In a typical outpatient programme, naltrexone addition was associated with significantly improved programme participation, better outcomes and was well tolerated.
Resumo:
Objective: To examine the knowledge and beliefs of doctors and nurses in inpatient psychiatric units about pro re nata (PRN) (as needed) medications for psychotic disorders. Methods: Medical (n = 44) and nursing (n = 80) staff in two metropolitan public hospital units completed a structured questionnaire about their use of PRN psychotropic medications on one occasion during the four months from March-June 1999. Results: Nurses selected more indications for PRN antipsychotics than doctors (3.49 vs 2.72, p < 0.05), whereas doctors selected more indications for PRN benzodiazepines (3.77 vs 3.19, p < 0.05). The groups did not differ in the number of selected indications for using anticholinergics. For agitation, the majority of nurses viewed both benzodiazepines (56%) and antipsychotics (86%) as effective, with 60% preferring an antipsychotic. For the acute control of psychotic symptoms, 99% of nurses believed antipsychotics were effective and 58% benzodiazepines, with 87% preferring an antipsychotic. A large majority of doctors viewed both PRN benzodiazepines, 94% ,and antipsychotics, 81%, as effective for agitation, and 55% preferred to use a benzodiazepine. For psychotic symptoms, 80% believed PRN antipsychotics were effective, but only 32% viewed benzodiazepines as effective, and 64% preferred to use an antipsychotic. Nursing staff identified more non-pharmacological techniques for managing both agitation and psychotic symptoms and reported using these more often than doctors. Junior staff, both nursing and medical, had less knowledge of non-pharmacological alternatives to PRN medication than senior staff. Conclusions: Disparities existed between doctors and nurses views on the indications for PRN medication in the acute management of psychoses, thus it is important for doctors to specify indications when writing PRN prescriptions. Despite evidence for the safety and effectiveness of benzodiazepines, there was widespread reluctance to use them as PRN medication in acute psychoses. Beliefs of some staff about PRN medications were at odds with the known properties of these medicines. Educational interventions for both nurses and doctors are required to achieve best practice in PRN medication.
Resumo:
Objective: To examine the use of pro re nata (PRN) (as needed) medication in hospitalized patients with psychotic disorders. Methods: Retrospective chart reviews were conducted at two large public psychiatry units situated in inner city general hospitals. Pro re nata medication prescription, administration and outcomes were examined during inpatient episodes of care for 184 consecutive admissions of patients diagnosed with a psychotic disorder. Patient demographics, diagnoses, and regularly prescribed medication were also recorded. All admissions were drawn from a three-month period from December 1998-February 1999. Results: The most prevalent diagnoses were schizophrenia related disorders (n = 111) and mania (n = 34). Substance use disorders (n = 49) were the most common comorbid dis-orders. Pro re nata medication was administered during the acute phase of 82% of admissions. Drugs prescribed Pro re nata were mostly typical antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and/or anti-cholinergics. Coprescription of typical antipsychotics PRN with regularly scheduled atypical antipsychotics was common (64%). Pro re nata medications accounted for 31% of the total antipsychotic dose and 28% of the total anxiolytic dose administered during acute treatment. Higher daily doses of PRN medication were given to manic patients, males, younger patients and those with substance use disorders. Pro re nata prescriptions usually specified a maximum daily dose (87%) but rarely gave indications for use (6%). Adminis-tration records frequently lacked a specified reason for use (48%) or a notation of outcome (64%). Unit staff noted medication-related morbidity in 37% of patients receiving PRN medication, compared to 3% of patients receiving only regularly scheduled medication. Extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) were most frequently associated with administration of PRN haloperidol (Relative Risk vs other PRN medications = 5.61, 95% CI = 2.36-13.73). Conclusions: Pro re nata medications comprised a significant part of the treatment which psychotic patients received. The common practice of coprescribing PRN typical antipsychotics with scheduled atypical antipsychotics is potentially problematical since administration of PRN medication is associated with significant medication related morbidity. Preferential use of benzodiazepines as PRN agents may minimize this morbidity and foster subsequent compliance with regularly prescribed antipsychotics.
Resumo:
Background: There is good evidence that angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are beneficial after myocardial infarction (MI). However, it is not known how widely this evidence is used in practice and whether all eligible patients receive this therapy. Aim: To assess the usage of ACE inhibitors in patients after MI in a large teaching hospital. Method: A one month prospective analysis, combined with a three month retrospective analysis, was conducted at the Royal Brisbane Hospital (RBH) in February-March 2000. Patients admitted with an MI or who had been diagnosed with an MI during admission from November 1999 to March 2000 were identified from the coronary care unit (CCU) records. Inpatient medication charts and outpatient records were then reviewed. Information collected included: ACE inhibitor use, doses, reasons for prescribing/not prescribing ACE inhibitors, and ACE inhibitor prescribers (cardiologists or general physicians). Results: Forty four patients with an MI were included in the study, 28 of whom were prescribed ACE-inhibitors (64%). Twenty four of the 28 patients on ACE inhibitors were prescribed perindopril. The major reason given for prescribing ACE inhibitors was signs of congestive cardiac failure. All ACE inhibitors initiated in patients after MI at RBH were ordered by cardiologists. Conclusion: ACE inhibitors were prescribed appropriately in 88% of patients who met criteria for their use. This high percentage of appropriate prescribing was encouraging. Reevaluation as part of an ongoing quality assurance activity could be used to ensure this is maintained.
Resumo:
Aim: To identify the demographics and risk factors in a selected patient population prescribed non-selective and cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX- 2) selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Method: A structured clinical self-audit form was distributed in January to March 2001 to 155 interested general practitioners (GPs) in rural Queensland. Results: Seventy one GPs participated in the audit and contributed 1417 patient records - 790 patients had received nonselective NSAIDs and 627 had received COX-2 inhibitors (celecoxib or rofecoxib). Patients who received COX-2 inhibitors were significantly older, more likely to have clinically important concomitant illness, and more likely to be taking medication known to interact with NSAIDs. They were also twice as likely to have two or more risk factors for adverse effects. The most common reasons for switching from an NSAID to a COX-2 inhibitor were reported to be a previous side effect from an NSAID (primarily related to gastrointestinal effects) or the doctor's perception of the superior efficacy of COX-2 inhibitor therapy. Conclusions: This study has shown that COX-2 inhibitors were used in a distinctly different patient population compared to non-selective NSAIDs. There were significant variations in the demographics and number of risk factors - for example, cardiovascular and renal - between the two identified populations. These differences may be due to doctors selecting COX-2 inhibitors for patients at high risk of gastrointestinal complications. However, the prescribing pattern may also be partly due to misconceptions about the relative safety and efficacy of COX-2 inhibitor drugs.
Resumo:
In many Australian hospitals a medical officer is available for urgent review of in-patients outside normal working hours. Current practice in nurse-initiated requests for medical officer involvement out of hours may adversely affect patient outcome as well as medical and nursing resource use at these times. Of 10 523 nurse-initiated requests for out-of-hours review recorded by medical officers at our hospital in 2002-2003, the most frequent reasons for the requests were medication review, IV fluid orders, IV resite, venesection and pathology review, none of which are related to acute changes in clinical condition. Requests for routine review of medication and fluid orders were found to be rarely essential and often inappropriate. Medical officer activity was highest before midnight and least after midnight, suggesting most requests are fulfilled in the evening. Several strategies to reduce inappropriate out-of-hours requests were identified. Routine tasks could be completed by primary treating unit staff before going off-duty. IV cannulation and venesection may be performed by appropriately trained phlebotomists or skilled advanced practice nursing staff. Meticulous ordering of 'as required' analgesia and night sedation would reduce unnecessary requests. Clinical protocols for nurse-initiated adjustment of drugs with variable dosing may also decrease inefficiencies. This would leave the ward cover medical officers more available for their primary function of urgent patient review.