A pilot study to evaluate the self-medication system for liver transplant patients at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham

Background and Objective: Medication non-compliance is a considerable obstacle in achievinga therapeutic goal, whichcan result in poorerhealthcare outcomes, increased expenditure, wastage and potential for medication resistance. The UK Government’s Audit Commission’s publication ‘A Spoonful of Sugar’1 addresses these issues and promotes self-medication systems as a possible solution. The self-medication system within the Liver Transplant Unit (LTU) was implemented to induct patients onto new post- transplantation medication regimes ready for discharge. The system involves initial consultations with both the Liver Transplant Pharmacist and Trans- plant Co-ordinator, supported with additional advice as and when necessary. Design: Following ethical approval, evaluation of the self-medication sys- tem for liver transplant patients was conducted between January and March 2004 via two methods: audit and structured post-transplantation interview. The audit enabled any discrepancies between current Hospital guidelines and Liver Transplant Unit (LTU) practices to be highlighted. Patient interviews generated a retrospective insight into patient acceptance of the self-medication system. Setting: LTU, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, England. Main Outcome Measures: LTU compliance with Hospital self-medication guidelines and patient insight into self-medication system. Results: A total of seven patients were audited. Findings illustrated that self- medication by transplant patients is a complex process which was not fully addressed by current Hospital self-medication guidelines. Twenty-three patients were interviewed, showing an overwhelming positive attitude to- wards participating in their own care and a high level of understanding towards their individual medication regimes. Following a drugs counselling session, 100% of patients understood why they were taking their medica- tion, and their doses, 95% understood how to take their medication and 85% were aware of potential side effects. Conclusions: From this pilot evaluation it can be stated that the LTU self-medication system is appreciated by patients and assists them in fully understanding their medication regimes. There appear to be no major defects in the system. However areas such as communication barriers and on-going internet education were illustrated as areas for possible future investigation. References: 1. Audit Commission. A spoonful of sugar – medicines management in NHS hospitals. London: Audit Commission; 2001.

Does audit improve quality in a hospital manufacturing unit?

OBJECTIVE - To establish whether auditing improves the overall quality of a hospital manufacturing unit. DESIGN - Continuous assessment of the quality level of a hospital manufacturing unit using 14 quality indicators over a nine-month period, and two periods of audit carried out towards the beginning and end of the assessment period. SETTING - The non-sterile manufacturing, sterile manufacturing and repackaging services areas at the pharmacy manufacturing unit at Queens Hospital, Burton-on- Trent. RESULTS - Compliance ratings for the second audit were better than those for the first audit, but there was no overall improvement in quality over the study period. CONCLUSION - Auditing probably improves compliance by focusing the minds of the staff involved, rather than by initiating a sustained improvement in overall quality.

Financial consequences of one-stop dispensing at Birmingham Children's Hospital

Poster session - Costs for one stop dispensing and the use of patients’ own drugs (PODs) were compared with traditional dispensing costs - It was found that operating a one-stop dispensing scheme, with the use of PODs where applicable, could save an average of £4.35 per patient per day on ward A and £5.19 per patient per day on ward B - These saving would equate to annual savings of £24,000 on ward A and £34,000 on ward B - Additional savings can be made to the secondary care budget as no in-patient drugs would be wasted upon patient discharge - These additional savings are an average £25.19 per patient on ward A and £13.42 per patient on ward B

Proton pump inhibitor prescribing following Endoscopic diagnosis in a district general hospital

Focal points: A systematic review of the use of proton pump inhibitors was conducted among patients undergoing diagnostic fibreoptic endoscopic examination of the upper gastrointestinal tract during the period July 2001 to February 2002 inclusive A total of 2,557 patients received a PPI following endoscopy and healing doses were prescribed to 75.3 per cent of these patients An “unknown indication” was stated as a diagnosis in 958 patients (37.5 per cent) of patients studied Although endoscopic diagnosis does not appear possible in all cases, the present study demonstrates that NICE guidance to employ the lowest appropriate dose of PPI is followed

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 production of a framework of competences for pharmacy practice in the European Union:the PHAR-QA project

Background and objectives: The goal of the PHAR-QA (Qualityassurance in European pharmacy education and training) project isthe production of a European framework of competences for pharmacypractice. This PHAR-QA framework (www.phar-qa.eu) will beEuropean and consultative i.e. it will be used for harmonization—butwill not to replace existing national QA systems.Methods: Using the proposals for competences produced by the previousPHARMINE(Pharmacy education in Europe; www.pharmine.eu) project, together with those of other sources, the authors produced a listof 68 personal and patient care competencies. Using internet surveytools the stakeholders—European pharmacy community (universitydepartment staff and students, community, hospital and industrialpharmacists, as well as pharmacists working in clinical biology andother branches, together with representatives of chambers and associations)—were invited to rank the proposals and add comments.Results and conclusions: Pharmacology and pharmacotherapy togetherwith competences such as ‘‘supply of appropriate medicinestaking into account dose, correct formulation, concentration, administrationroute and timing’’ ranked high. Other topics such as ‘‘currentknowledge of design, synthesis, isolation, characterisation and biologicalevaluation of active substances’’ ranked lower.Implications for practice: In the short term, it is anticipated that thissurvey will stimulate a productive discussion on pharmacy educationand practice by the various stakeholders. In the long term, thisframework could serve as a European model framework of competencesfor pharmacy practice.Acknowledgements: With the support of the Lifelong Learningprogramme of the European Union: 527194-LLP-1-2012-1-BEERASMUS-EMCR. This publication reflects the views only of theauthors; the Commission cannot be held responsible for any usewhich may be made of the information contained therein.

An evaluation of paediatric medicines reconciliation at hospital discharge into the community

OBJECTIVE: A UK national survey of primary care physicians has indicated that the medication information on hospital discharge summary was incomplete or inaccurate most of the time. Internationally, studies have shown that hospital pharmacist's interventions reduce these discrepancies in the adult population. There have been no published studies on the incidence and severity of the discrepancies of the medication prescribed for children specifically at discharge to date. The objectives of this study were to investigate the incidence, nature and potential clinical severity of medication discrepancies at the point of hospital discharge in a paediatric setting. METHODS: Five weeks prospective review of hospital discharge letters was carried out. Medication discrepancies between the initial doctor's discharge letter and finalised drug chart were identified, pharmacist changes were recorded and their severity was assessed. The setting of the review was at a London, UK paediatric hospital providing local secondary and specialist tertiary care. The outcome measures were: - incidence and the potential clinical severity of medication discrepancies identified by the hospital pharmacist at discharge. KEY FINDINGS: 142 patients (64 female and 78 males, age range 1 month - 18 years) were discharged on 501 medications. The majority of patients were under the care of general surgery and general paediatric teams. One in three discharge letters contained at least one medication discrepancy and required pharmacist interventions to rectify prior to completion. Of these, 1 in 10 had the potential for patient harm if undetected. CONCLUSIONS: Medicines reconciliation by pharmacist at discharge may be a good intervention in preventing medication discrepancies which have the potential to cause moderate harm in paediatric patients.

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