Assessment of markers of medication literacy in a US-Mexico border community

Each year an estimated 180,000 people in the United States (U.S.) die as a result of medication errors, now considered a major public health problem. If a patient cannot correctly act on information related to medication use or "Medication Literacy" there is an increased potential for error. Medication use issues are unique on the US-Mexico border because they include high rates of herbal products and medication products from Mexico as well as issues related to the preferred language (English or Spanish) of the patient. To evaluate the medication literacy in a US-Mexico border community, this retrospective study evaluates 180 subjects representing four diverse economic segments of a metropolitan US-Mexico Border community who have taken a Medication Literacy Assessment. The assessment tool has been created to understand how patients interpret medication information for prescription, over-the-counter, herbal, and Mexican medication product use, and how they problem-solve medication questions. The Medication Literacy Assessment tool specifically assesses document literacy (e.g., prescription labels), prose literacy (e.g., patient leaflets), numeracy (e.g., calculations and measurements) as well as qualitative data related to medication use practices. The main hypothesis of this study is that the ability to interpret and use medications will vary based on education, language (Spanish or English), and recruitment sites (economically diverse communities). The results will provide information to better characterize medication use in a primarily Hispanic population on the US-Mexico border and may be used to influence policy decisions regarding prescription and over-the-counter product information.^

A case-control study of medication-associated acute kidney injuries in hospitalized pediatric patients

Acute kidney Injury (AKI) in hospitalized pediatric patients can be a significant event that can result in increased patient morbidity and mortality. The incidence of medication associated AKI is increasing in the pediatric population. Currently, there are no data to quantify the risks of developing AKI for various potentially nephrotoxic medications. The primary objective of this study was to determine the odds of nephrotoxic medication exposure in hospitalized pediatric patients with AKI as defined by the pediatric modified pRIFLE criteria. A retrospective case-control study was performed with patients that developed AKI, as defined by the pediatric pRIFLE criteria, as cases, and patients without AKI as controls that were matched by age category, gender, and disease state. Patients between 1 day and 18 years of age, admitted to a non-intensive care unit at Texas Children's Hospital for at least 3 days, and had at least 2 serum creatinine values drawn were included. Patient data was analyzed with Student's t test, Mann-Whitney U test, Chi square analysis, ANOVA, and conditional logistic regression. ^ Out of 1,660 patients identified for inclusion, 561 (33.8%) patients had AKI, and 357 cases were matched with 357 controls to become pairs. Of the cases, 441 were category 'R', 117 category 'I', 3 patients were category 'F', and no patient died. Cases with AKI were significantly younger than controls (p < 0.05). Significantly longer hospital length of stays, increased hospital costs, and exposure to more nephrotoxic medications for a longer period of time were characteristics of patients with AKI compared to patient without AKI. Patients with AKI had greater odds of exposure to one or more nephrotoxic medication than patients without AKI (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1–1.4, p < 0.05). Percent changes in estimated creatinine clearance (eCCl) from baseline were greatest with increased number of nephrotoxic medication exposures. ^ Exposure to potentially nephrotoxic medications may place pediatric patients at greater risk of acute kidney injury. Multiple nephrotoxic medication exposure may confer a greater risk of development of acute kidney injury, and result in increased hospital costs and patient morbidity. Due to the high percentage of patients that were exposed to potentially nephrotoxic medications, monitoring and medication selection strategies may need to be altered to prevent or minimize risk.^

Nursing-related medication errors: A review of factors that facilitate and hinder error reporting, and recommendations for improvement

Medication errors, one of the most frequent types of medical errors, are a common cause of patient harm in hospital systems today. Nurses at the bedside are in a position to encounter many of these errors since they are there at the start of the process (ordering/prescribing) and the end of the process (administration). One of the recommendations from the IOM (Institute of Medicine) report, "To Err is Human," was for organizations to identify and learn from medical errors through event reporting systems. While many organizations have reporting systems in place, research studies report a significant amount of underreporting by nurses. A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify contributing factors related to the reporting and not reporting of medication errors by nurses at the bedside.^ Articles included in the literature review were primary or secondary studies, dated January 1, 2000 – July 2009, related to nursing medication error reporting. All 634 articles were reviewed with an algorithm developed to standardize the review process and help filter out those that did not meet the study criteria. In addition, 142 article bibliographies were reviewed to find additional studies that were not found in the original literature search.^ After reviewing the 634 articles and the additional 108 articles discovered in the bibliography review, 41 articles met the study criteria and were used in the systematic literature review results.^ Fear of punitive reactions to medication errors was a frequent barrier to error reporting. Nurses fear reactions from their leadership, peers, patients and their families, nursing boards, and the media. Anonymous reporting systems and departments/organizations with a strong safety culture in place helped to encourage the reporting of medication errors by nursing staff.^ Many of the studies included in this literature review do not allow results that can be generalized. The majority of them took place in single institutions/organizations with limited sample sizes. Stronger studies with larger sample sizes need to be performed, utilizing data collection methods that have been validated, to determine stronger correlations between safety cultures and nurse error reporting.^

Nurse likelihood to report a pediatric medication error: Examination of the "pre-reporting" period

Each year, hospitalized patients experience 1.5 million preventable injuries from medication errors and hospitals incur an additional $3.5 billion in cost (Aspden, Wolcott, Bootman, & Cronenwatt; (2007). It is believed that error reporting is one way to learn about factors contributing to medication errors. And yet, an estimated 50% of medication errors go unreported. This period of medication error pre-reporting, with few exceptions, is underexplored. The literature focuses on error prevention and management, but lacks a description of the period of introspection and inner struggle over whether to report an error and resulting likelihood to report. Reporting makes a nurse vulnerable to reprimand, legal liability, and even threat to licensure. For some nurses this state may invoke a disparity between a person‘s belief about him or herself as a healer and the undeniable fact of the error.^ This study explored the medication error reporting experience. Its purpose was to inform nurses, educators, organizational leaders, and policy-makers about the medication error pre-reporting period, and to contribute to a framework for further investigation. From a better understanding of factors that contribute to or detract from the likelihood of an individual to report an error, interventions can be identified to help the nurse come to a psychologically healthy resolution and help increase reporting of error in order to learn from error and reduce the possibility of future similar error.^ The research question was: "What factors contribute to a nurse's likelihood to report an error?" The specific aims of the study were to: (1) describe participant nurses' perceptions of medication error reporting; (2) describe participant explanations of the emotional, cognitive, and physical reactions to making a medication error; (3) identify pre-reporting conditions that make it less likely for a nurse to report a medication error; and (4) identify pre-reporting conditions that make it more likely for a nurse to report a medication error.^ A qualitative research study was conducted to explore the medication error experience and in particular the pre-reporting period from the perspective of the nurse. A total of 54 registered nurses from a large private free-standing not-for-profit children's hospital in the southwestern United States participated in group interviews. The results describe the experience of the nurse as well as the physical, emotional, and cognitive responses to the realization of the commission of a medication error. The results also reveal factors that make it more and less likely to report a medication error.^ It is clear from this study that upon realization that he or she has made a medication error, a nurse's foremost concern is for the safety of the patient. Fear was also described by each group of nurses. The nurses described a fear of several things including physician reaction, manager reaction, peer reaction, as well as family reaction and possible lack of trust as a result. Another universal response was the description of a struggle with guilt, shame, imperfection, blaming oneself, and questioning one's competence.^

Errors in the administration of medication in inpatient hospitals: A systematic review of the research literature on commercial computerized physician order entry systems

Errors in the administration of medication represent a significant loss of medical resources and pose life altering or life threatening risks to patients. This paper considered the question, what impact do Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) systems have on medication errors in the hospital inpatient environment? Previous reviews have examined evidence of the impact of CPOE on medication errors, but have come to ambiguous conclusions as to the impact of CPOE and decision support systems (DSS). Forty-three papers were identified. Thirty-one demonstrated a significant reduction in prescribing error rates for all or some drug types; decreases in minor errors were most often reported. Several studies reported increases in the rate of duplicate orders and failures to remove contraindicated drugs, often attributed to inappropriate design or to an inability to operate the system properly. The evidence on the effectiveness of CPOE to reduce errors in medication administration is compelling though it is limited by modest study sample sizes and designs. ^

Costs and quality of medication reconciliation practice in primary care clinics

Medication reconciliation, with the aim to resolve medication discrepancy, is one of the Joint Commission patient safety goals. Medication errors and adverse drug events that could result from medication discrepancy affect a large population. At least 1.5 million adverse drug events and $3.5 billion of financial burden yearly associated with medication errors could be prevented by interventions such as medication reconciliation. This research was conducted to answer the following research questions: (1a) What are the frequency range and type of measures used to report outpatient medication discrepancy? (1b) Which effective and efficient strategies for medication reconciliation in the outpatient setting have been reported? (2) What are the costs associated with medication reconciliation practice in primary care clinics? (3) What is the quality of medication reconciliation practice in primary care clinics? (4) Is medication reconciliation practice in primary care clinics cost-effective from the clinic perspective? Study designs used to answer these questions included a systematic review, cost analysis, quality assessments, and cost-effectiveness analysis. Data sources were published articles in the medical literature and data from a prospective workflow study, which included 150 patients and 1,238 medications. The systematic review confirmed that the prevalence of medication discrepancy was high in ambulatory care and higher in primary care settings. Effective strategies for medication reconciliation included the use of pharmacists, letters, a standardized practice approach, and partnership between providers and patients. Our cost analysis showed that costs associated with medication reconciliation practice were not substantially different between primary care clinics using or not using electronic medical records (EMR) ($0.95 per patient per medication in EMR clinics vs. $0.96 per patient per medication in non-EMR clinics, p=0.78). Even though medication reconciliation was frequently practiced (97-98%), the quality of such practice was poor (0-33% of process completeness measured by concordance of medication numbers and 29-33% of accuracy measured by concordance of medication names) and negatively (though not significantly) associated with medication regimen complexity. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for concordance of medication number per patient per medication and concordance of medication names per patient per medication were both 0.08, favoring EMR. Future studies including potential cost-savings from medication features of the EMR and potential benefits to minimize severity of harm to patients from medication discrepancy are warranted. ^

Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of oncology nurses' experiences.

BACKGROUND Double-checking is widely recommended as an essential method to prevent medication errors. However, prior research has shown that the concept of double-checking is not clearly defined, and that little is known about actual practice in oncology, for example, what kind of checking procedures are applied. OBJECTIVE To study the practice of different double-checking procedures in chemotherapy administration and to explore nurses' experiences, for example, how often they actually find errors using a certain procedure. General evaluations regarding double-checking, for example, frequency of interruptions during and caused by a check, or what is regarded as its essential feature was assessed. METHODS In a cross-sectional survey, qualified nurses working in oncology departments of 3 hospitals were asked to rate 5 different scenarios of double-checking procedures regarding dimensions such as frequency of use in practice and appropriateness to prevent medication errors; they were also asked general questions about double-checking. RESULTS Overall, 274 nurses (70% response rate) participated in the survey. The procedure of jointly double-checking (read-read back) was most commonly used (69% of respondents) and rated as very appropriate to prevent medication errors. Jointly checking medication was seen as the essential characteristic of double-checking-more frequently than 'carrying out checks independently' (54% vs 24%). Most nurses (78%) found the frequency of double-checking in their department appropriate. Being interrupted in one's own current activity for supporting a double-check was reported to occur frequently. Regression analysis revealed a strong preference towards checks that are currently implemented at the responders' workplace. CONCLUSIONS Double-checking is well regarded by oncology nurses as a procedure to help prevent errors, with jointly checking being used most frequently. Our results show that the notion of independent checking needs to be transferred more actively into clinical practice. The high frequency of reported interruptions during and caused by double-checks is of concern.

Medication review in the elderly: how competent are community pharmacists in detecting drug-related problems?

Poster presented at the 5th PCNE Working Symposium 2016: “Work in Progress – Progress in Work”, 19-20 February 2016, Hillerød, Denmark.

A national e-Delphi towards the measurement of safe medication practices in Portuguese hospitals

Objectives To determine the face and content validity of items for measuring safe medication practices in Portuguese hospitals. Methods 128 items were drafted from content analysis of existing questionnaires and the literature, employing preferred terms of the WHO International Classification for Patient Safety (Portuguese version). A two-round e-Delphi was convened, using a purposive multidisciplinary panel. Hospital-based experts were asked to rate the relevance of items on a 7-point Likert scale and to comment on their clarity and completeness. Results The response rate was similar in both rounds (70.3% and 73.4%, respectively). In the first round 91/128 (71.1%) items reached the predefined level of positive consensus. In the second round 23 additional items reached positive consensus, as well as seven items newly derived by the panel. Conclusions Most items have face and content validity, indicating relevance and clarity, and can be included in a future questionnaire for measuring safe medication practices in Portuguese hospitals.

Virtual car accidents of epilepsy patients, interictal epileptic activity, and medication.

OBJECTIVE To investigate effects of interictal epileptic activity (IEA) and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) on reactivity and aspects of the fitness to drive for epilepsy patients. METHODS Forty-six adult patients with demonstration of focal or generalized bursts of IEA in electroencephalography (EEG) readings within 1 year prior to inclusion irrespective of medication performed a car driving computer test or a single light flash test (39 patients performed both). Reaction times (RTs), virtual crashes, or lapses (RT ≥ 1 s in the car or flash test) were measured in an IEA burst-triggered fashion during IEA and compared with RT-measurements during unremarkable EEG findings in the same session. RESULTS IEA prolonged RTs both in the flash and car test (p < 0.001) in individual patients up to 200 ms. Generalized IEA with spike/waves (s/w) had the largest effect on RT prolongation (p < 0.001, both tests), whereas mean RT during normal EEG, age, gender, and number of AEDs had no effect. The car test was better than the flash test in detecting RT prolongations (p = 0.030). IEA increased crashes/lapses >26% in sessions with generalized IEA with s/w. The frequency of IEA-associated RT >1 s exceeded predictions (p < 0.001) based on simple RT shift, suggesting functional impairment beyond progressive RT prolongation by IEA. The number of AEDs correlated with prolonged RTs during normal EEG (p < 0.021) but not with IEA-associated RT prolongation or crashes/lapses. SIGNIFICANCE IEA prolonged RTs to varying extents, dependent on IEA type. IEA-associated RTs >1 s were more frequent than predicted, suggesting beginning cerebral decompensation of visual stimulus processing. AEDs somewhat reduced psychomotor speed, but it was mainly the IEA that contributed to an excess of virtual accidents.

The handbook of feedstuffs; production, formulation, medication,

Includes bibliographies.