Systematic review of medication safety assessment methods

Purpose The accuracy, efficiency, and efficacy of four commonly recommended medication safety assessment methodologies were systematically reviewed. Methods Medical literature databases were systematically searched for any comparative study conducted between January 2000 and October 2009 in which at least two of the four methodologies—incident report review, direct observation, chart review, and trigger tool—were compared with one another. Any study that compared two or more methodologies for quantitative accuracy (adequacy of the assessment of medication errors and adverse drug events) efficiency (effort and cost), and efficacy and that provided numerical data was included in the analysis. Results Twenty-eight studies were included in this review. Of these, 22 compared two of the methodologies, and 6 compared three methods. Direct observation identified the greatest number of reports of drug-related problems (DRPs), while incident report review identified the fewest. However, incident report review generally showed a higher specificity compared to the other methods and most effectively captured severe DRPs. In contrast, the sensitivity of incident report review was lower when compared with trigger tool. While trigger tool was the least labor-intensive of the four methodologies, incident report review appeared to be the least expensive, but only when linked with concomitant automated reporting systems and targeted follow-up. Conclusion All four medication safety assessment techniques—incident report review, chart review, direct observation, and trigger tool—have different strengths and weaknesses. Overlap between different methods in identifying DRPs is minimal. While trigger tool appeared to be the most effective and labor-efficient method, incident report review best identified high-severity DRPs.

New methods can extend the use of minimal important difference units in meta-analyses of continuous outcome measures

For continuous outcomes measured using instruments with an established minimally important difference (MID), pooled estimates can be usefully reported in MID units. Approaches suggested thus far omit studies that used instruments without an established MID. We describe an approach that addresses this limitation.

SPIRIT Women, evaluation of the safety and efficacy of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent system in female patients: referral time for coronary intervention and 2-year clinical outcomes

SPIRIT Women is the first interventional trial dedicated exclusively to women, focusing on symptoms at presentation, referral time to coronary intervention and the safety and performance of the XIENCE V stent.

Content comparison of health status measures for obesity based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health

OBJECTIVE: To compare the content covered by twelve obesity-specific health status measures using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). DESIGN: Obesity-specific health status measures were identified and then linked to the ICF separately by two trained health professionals according to standardized guidelines. The degree of agreement between health professionals was calculated by means of the kappa (kappa) statistic. Bootstrapped confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The obesity-specific health-status measures were compared on the component and category level of the ICF. MEASUREMENTS: welve condition-specific health-status measures were identified and included in this study, namely the obesity-related problem scale, the obesity eating problems scale, the obesity-related coping and obesity-related distress questionnaire, the impact of weight on quality of life questionnaire (short version), the health-related quality of life questionnaire, the obesity adjustment survey (short form), the short specific quality of life scale, the obesity-related well-being questionnaire, the bariatric analysis and reporting outcome system, the bariatric quality of life index, the obesity and weight loss quality of life questionnaire and the weight-related symptom measure. RESULTS: In the 280 items of the eight measures, a total of 413 concepts were identified and linked to the 87 different ICF categories. The measures varied strongly in the number of concepts contained and the number of ICF categories used to map these concepts. Items on body functions varied form 12% in the obesity-related problem scale to 95% in the weight-related symptom measure. The estimated kappa coefficients ranged between 0.79 (CI: 0.72, 0.86) at the component ICFs level and 0.97 (CI: 0.93, 1.0) at the third ICF's level. CONCLUSION: The ICF proved highly useful for the content comparison of obesity-specific health-status measures. The results may provide clinicians and researchers with new insights when selecting health-status measures for clinical studies in obesity.

A randomized comparison of the safety and efficacy of once-daily gentamicin or thrice-daily gentamicin in combination with ticarcillin-clavulanate

PURPOSE: The primary purpose of the clinical trial was to assess the safety and efficacy of once-a-day compared with three-times-a-day gentamicin in patients with serious infections who had protocol-determined peak serum aminoglycoside concentrations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 249 hospitalized patients with suspected or proven serious infections were randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to gentamicin given three times a day with ticarcillin-clavulanate (TC), gentamicin once a day with TC, or ticarcillin-clavulanate (TC) alone. The gentamicin once-a-day dosage for patients with estimated creatinine clearance values of > or =80 mL/min was 5.1 mg/kg. With lower creatinine clearance estimates, the mg/kg dosage of gentamicin was decreased, and the dosage intervals (once daily or three times a day) were maintained. Evaluability required documentation of achievement of protocol-defined peak serum gentamicin levels. RESULTS: Of the total 175 evaluable patients, there were no significant differences found between treatment regimens with respect to clinical or microbiologic efficacy. Bedside audiometry proved impractical due to the frequency of altered mental state in ill patients. Based on the traditional increase in serum creatinine values from baseline values, no differences in renal toxicity between the treatment groups was identified. When changes in renal function were reanalyzed based on maintaining, as opposed to worsening, of renal function, preservation of renal function was better in the gentamicin once-a-day patients as opposed to the gentamicin three-times-a-day patients, P <0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Gentamicin once a day plus TC, gentamicin three times a day plus TC, and TC alone had similar effects in seriously ill hospitalized patients. The incidence of nephrotoxicity was similar in the three treatment groups. Using a nonvalidated post-hoc analysis, renal function was better preserved in gentamicin once-a-day + TC and TC-only patients as opposed to gentamicin three-times-a-day + TC.

Prognostic value of the modified American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association lesion morphology classification for clinical outcome after sirolimus-eluting stent placement (results of the prospective multicenter German Cypher Registry)

The modified American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) lesion morphology classification scheme has prognostic impact for early and late outcomes when bare-metal stents are used. Its value after drug-eluting stent placement is unknown. The predictive value of this lesion morphology classification system in patients treated using sirolimus-eluting stents included in the German Cypher Registry was prospectively examined. The study population included 6,755 patients treated for 7,960 lesions using sirolimus-eluting stents. Lesions were classified as type A, B1, B2, or C. Lesion type A or B1 was considered simple (35.1%), and type B2 or C, complex (64.9%). The combined end point of all deaths, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization was seen in 2.6% versus 2.4% in the complex and simple groups, respectively (p = 0.62) at initial hospital discharge, with a trend for higher rates of myocardial infarction in the complex group. At the 6-month clinical follow-up and after adjusting for other independent factors, the composite of cumulative death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization was nonsignificantly different between groups (11.4% vs 11.2% in the complex and simple groups, respectively; odds ratio 1.08, 95% confidence interval 0.8 to 1.46). This was also true for target vessel revascularization alone (8.3% of the complex group, 9.0% of the simple group; odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 1.05). In conclusion, the modified ACC/AHA lesion morphology classification system has some value in determining early complications after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. Clinical follow-up results at 6 months were generally favorable and cannot be adequately differentiated on the basis of this lesion morphology classification scheme.

Clinical relevance of brain volume measures in multiple sclerosis.

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease with an inflammatory and neurodegenerative pathology. Axonal loss and neurodegeneration occurs early in the disease course and may lead to irreversible neurological impairment. Changes in brain volume, observed from the earliest stage of MS and proceeding throughout the disease course, may be an accurate measure of neurodegeneration and tissue damage. There are a number of magnetic resonance imaging-based methods for determining global or regional brain volume, including cross-sectional (e.g. brain parenchymal fraction) and longitudinal techniques (e.g. SIENA [Structural Image Evaluation using Normalization of Atrophy]). Although these methods are sensitive and reproducible, caution must be exercised when interpreting brain volume data, as numerous factors (e.g. pseudoatrophy) may have a confounding effect on measurements, especially in a disease with complex pathological substrates such as MS. Brain volume loss has been correlated with disability progression and cognitive impairment in MS, with the loss of grey matter volume more closely correlated with clinical measures than loss of white matter volume. Preventing brain volume loss may therefore have important clinical implications affecting treatment decisions, with several clinical trials now demonstrating an effect of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) on reducing brain volume loss. In clinical practice, it may therefore be important to consider the potential impact of a therapy on reducing the rate of brain volume loss. This article reviews the measurement of brain volume in clinical trials and practice, the effect of DMTs on brain volume change across trials and the clinical relevance of brain volume loss in MS.

Safety climate in Swiss hospital units: Swiss version of the Safety Climate Survey

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES Safety climate measurements are a broadly used element of improvement initiatives. In order to provide a sound and easy-to-administer instrument for the use in Swiss hospitals, we translated the Safety Climate Survey into German and French. METHODS After translating the Safety Climate Survey into French and German, a cross-sectional survey study was conducted with health care professionals (HCPs) in operating room (OR) teams and on OR-related wards in 10 Swiss hospitals. Validity of the instrument was examined by means of Cronbach's alpha and missing rates of the single items. Item-descriptive statistics group differences and percentage of 'problematic responses' (PPR) were calculated. RESULTS 3153 HCPs completed the survey (response rate: 63.4%). 1308 individuals were excluded from the analyses because of a profession other than doctor or nurse or invalid answers (n = 1845; nurses = 1321, doctors = 523). Internal consistency of the translated Safety Climate Survey was good (Cronbach's alpha G erman  = 0.86; Cronbach's alpha F rench  = 0.84). Missing rates at item level were rather low (0.23-4.3%). We found significant group differences in safety climate values regarding profession, managerial function, work area and time spent in direct patient care. At item level, 14 out of 21 items showed a PPR higher than 10%. CONCLUSIONS Results indicate that the French and German translations of the Safety Climate Survey might be a useful measurement instrument for safety climate in Swiss hospital units. Analyses at item level allow for differentiating facets of safety climate into more positive and critical safety climate aspects.