Estimating the scope for savings in referrals and drug prescription costs in the general Practice units of a UK primary care trust

This paper explores the potential for cost savings in the general Practice units of a Primary Care Trust (PCT) in the UK. We have used Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to identify benchmark Practices, which offer the lowest aggregate referral and drugs costs controlling for the number, age, gender, and deprivation level of the patients registered with each Practice. For the remaining, non-benchmark Practices, estimates of the potential for savings on referral and drug costs were obtained. Such savings could be delivered through a combination of the following actions: (i) reducing the levels of referrals and prescriptions without affecting their mix (£15.74 m savings were identified, representing 6.4% of total expenditure); (ii) switching between inpatient and outpatient referrals and/or drug treatment to exploit differences in their unit costs (£10.61 m savings were identified, representing 4.3% of total expenditure); (iii) seeking a different profile of referral and drug unit costs (£11.81 m savings were identified, representing 4.8% of total expenditure). © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Medication reconciliation by a pharmacy technician in a mental health assessment unit

Background: Medication discrepancies are common when patients cross organisational boundaries. However, little is known about the frequency of discrepancies within mental health and the efficacy of interventions to reduce discrepancies. Objective: To evaluate the impact of a pharmacy-led reconciliation service on medication discrepancies on admissions to a secondary care mental health trust. Setting: In-patient mental health services. Methods: Prospective evaluation of pharmacy technician led medication reconciliation for admissions to a UK Mental Health NHS Trust. From March to June 2012 information on any unintentional discrepancies (dose, frequency and name of medication); patient demographics; and type and cause of the discrepancy was collected. The potential for harm was assessed based on two scenarios; the discrepancy was continued into primary care, and the discrepancy was corrected during admission. Logistic regression identified factors associated with discrepancies. Main outcome measure: Mean number of discrepancies per admission corrected by the pharmacy technician. Results Unintentional medication discrepancies occurred in 212 of 377 admissions (56.2 %). Discrepancies involving 569 medicines (mean 1.5 medicines per admission) were corrected. The most common discrepancy was omission (n = 464). Severity was assessed for 114 discrepancies. If the discrepancy was corrected within 16 days the potential harm was minor in 71 (62.3 %) cases and moderate in 43 (37.7 %) cases whereas if the discrepancy was not corrected the potential harm was minor in 27 (23.7 %) cases and moderate in 87 (76.3 %) cases. Discrepancies were associated with both age and number of medications; the stronger association was age. Conclusions: Medication discrepancies are common within mental health services with potentially significant consequences for patients. Trained pharmacy technicians are able to reduce the frequency of discrepancies, improving safety. © 2013 Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij ter bevordering der Pharmacie.