Challenges of managing medications for older people at transition points of care

In clinical practice, pharmacists play a very important role in identifying and correcting medication discrepancies as older patients move across transition points of care. With increasing complexity of health care needs of older people, these discrepancies are likely to increase. The major concern with identifying and correcting medication discrepancies is that medication reconciliation is considered a retrospective problem – that is, dealing with medication discrepancies after they have occurred. It is argued here that a more proactive stance should be taken where doctors, nurses and pharmacists collectively work together to prevent medication discrepancies from happening in the first place. Improved involvement of patients and family members will help to facilitate better management of medications across transition points of care. Efficient use of information technology aids, such as electronic medication reconciliation tools, should also assist with organizational systems problems associated with the working culture, heavy workloads, and staff and skill mix of health professionals.

Determining clinical pharmacy workload by patient disease classification in medical and surgical patients

Aim: To determine the time needed to provide clinical pharmacy services to individual patient episodes for medical and surgical patients and the effect of patient presentation and complexity on the clinical pharmacy workload. Method: During a 5-month period in 2006 at two general hospitals, pharmacists recorded a defined range of activities that they provided for patients, including the actual times required for these tasks. A customised database linked to the two hospitals' patient administration systems stored the data according to the specific patient episode number. The influence of patient presentation and complexity on the clinical pharmacy activities provided was also examined. Results: The average time required by pharmacists to undertake a medication history interview and medication reconciliation was 9.6 (SD 4.9) minutes. Interventions required 5.7 (SD 4.6) minutes, clinical review of the medical record 5.5 (SD 4.0) minutes and medication order review 3.5 (SD 2.0) minutes. For all of these activities, the time required for medical patients was greater than for surgical patients and greater for 'complicated' patients. The average time required to perform all clinical pharmacy activities for 1071 completed patient episodes was 14.4 (SD 10.9) minutes and was greater for medical and 'complicated' patients. Conclusion: The time needed to provide clinical pharmacy services was affected by whether the patients were medical or surgical. The existence of comorbidities or complications affected these times. The times required to perform clinical pharmacy activities may not be consistent with recently proposed staff ratios for the provision of a basic clinical pharmacy service.

Challenges of managing medications for older people at transition points of care

In clinical practice, pharmacists play a very important role in identifying and correcting medication discrepancies as older patients move across transition points of care. With increasing complexity of health care needs of older people, these discrepancies are likely to increase. The major concern with identifying and correcting medication discrepancies is that medication reconciliation is considered a retrospective problem - that is, dealing with medication discrepancies after they have occurred. It is argued here that a more proactive stance should be taken where doctors, nurses and pharmacists collectively work together to prevent medication discrepancies from happening in the first place. Improved involvement of patients and family members will help to facilitate better management of medications across transition points of care. Efficient use of information technology aids, such as electronic medication reconciliation tools, should also assist with organizational systems problems associated with the working culture, heavy workloads, and staff and skill mix of health professionals.

Patient Safety Alert : A new way to share patient safety information among departments and units

Communication : If there is one topic that comes up over and over again as we discuss ways to make John Dempsey Hospital the safest hospital, it is “communication.” In fact, several of the 2006 and 2007 National Patient Safety Goals are centered around improving the effectiveness of communication among caregivers. There are many ways of doing this, and we have implemented several already. These include handoffs, medication reconciliation, “SBAR,” etc. On page two, we will talk in more detail about hand-offs and the use of “SBAR.”

Medicines management across the primary-hospital healthcare interface: a study of paediatric patients

A comparison of medicines management documents in use by NHS organisations in the West Midlands confirms that there are important differences between the primary care and hospital sectors in respect to medicines management interface issues. Of these, two aspects important to paediatric patients have been studied. These are the transfer of information as a patient is admitted to hospital, and access to long-term medicines for home-patients. National guidance provided by NICE requires medication reconciliation to be undertaken on admission to hospital for adults. A study of paediatric admissions, reported in this thesis, demonstrates that the clinical importance of this process is at least as important for children as for adults, and challenges current UK guidance. The transfer of essential medication information on hospital admission is central to the medication reconciliation process. Two surveys of PCTs in 2007 and again in 2009 demonstrate that very few PCTs provide guidance to GPs to support this process. Provision of guidance is increasing slowly but remains the exception. The provision of long-term medicines for children at home is hindered by this patient population often needing unlicensed drugs. Further studies demonstrate that primary care processes regularly fail to maintain access to essential drugs and patients and their carers frequently turn to hospitals for help. Surveys of hospital medical staff (single site) and hospital nurses (six UK sites) demonstrates the activity these healthcare workers perform to help children get the medicines they need. A similar survey of why carers turn to a hospital pharmacy department for urgent supplies (usually termed rescue-medicines) adds to the understanding of these problems and supports identifying service changes. A large survey of community pharmacies demonstrates the difficulties they have when dispensing hospital prescriptions and identifies practical solutions. This programme concludes by recommending service changes to support medication management for children.

An evaluation of the epidemiology of medication discrepancies and clinical significance of medicines reconciliation in children admitted to hospital

Aims: To determine the incidence of unintended medication discrepancies in paediatric patients at the time of hospital admission; evaluate the process of medicines reconciliation; assess the benefit of medicines reconciliation in preventing clinical harm. Method: A 5 month prospective multisite study. Pharmacists at four English hospitals conducted admission medicines reconciliation in children using a standardised data collection form. A discrepancy was defined as a difference between the patient's preadmission medication (PAM), compared with the initial admission medication orders written by the hospital doctor. The discrepancies were classified into intentional and unintentional discrepancies. The unintentional discrepancies were assessed for potential clinical harm by a team of healthcare professionals, which included doctors, pharmacists and nurses. Results: Medicines reconciliation was conducted in 244 children admitted to hospital. 45% (109/244) of the children had at least one unintentional medication discrepancy between the PAM and admission medication order. The overall results indicated that 32% (78/244) of patients had at least one clinically significant unintentional medication discrepancy with potential to cause moderate 20% (50/244) or severe 11% (28/244) harm. No single source of information provided all the relevant details of a patient's medication history. Parents/carers provided the most accurate details of a patient's medication history in 81% of cases. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that in the absence of medicines reconciliation, children admitted to hospitals across England are at risk of harm from unintended medication discrepancies at the transition of care from the community to hospital. No single source of information provided a reliable medication history.

Medicines reconciliation in comparison with NICE guidelines across secondary care mental health organisations

Background Medicines reconciliation-identifying and maintaining an accurate list of a patient's current medications-should be undertaken at all transitions of care and available to all patients. Objective A self-completion web survey was conducted for chief pharmacists (or equivalent) to evaluate medicines reconciliation levels in secondary care mental health organisations. Setting The survey was sent to secondary care mental health organisations in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. Method The survey was launched via Bristol Online Surveys. Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data was collected through respondents free-text answers to specific questions. Main outcomes measure Investigate how medicines reconciliation is delivered, incorporate a clear description of the role of pharmacy staff and identify areas of concern. Results Forty-two (52 % response rate) surveys were completed. Thirty-seven (88.1 %) organisations have a formal policy for medicines reconciliation with defined steps. Results show that the pharmacy team (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians) are the main professionals involved in medicines reconciliation with a high rate of doctors also involved. Training procedures frequently include an induction by pharmacy for doctors whilst the pharmacy team are generally trained by another member of pharmacy. Mental health organisations estimate that nearly 80 % of medicines reconciliation is carried out within 24 h of admission. A full medicines reconciliation is not carried out on patient transfer between mental health wards; instead quicker and less exhaustive variations are implemented. 71.4 % of organisations estimate that pharmacy staff conduct daily medicine reconciliations for acute admission wards (Monday to Friday). However, only 38 % of organisations self-report to pharmacy reconciling patients' medication for other teams that admit from primary care. Conclusion Most mental health organisations appear to be complying with NICE guidance on medicines reconciliation for their acute admission wards. However, medicines reconciliation is conducted less frequently on other units that admit from primary care and rarely completed on transfer when it significantly differs to that on admission. Formal training and competency assessments on medicines reconciliation should be considered as current training varies and adherence to best practice is questionable.

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.

Medicines reconciliation at the point of hospital discharge for children

Objectives: Hospital discharge is a transition of care, where medication discrepancies are likely to occur and potentially cause patient harm. The purpose of our study was to assess the prescribing accuracy of hospital discharge medication orders at a London, UK teaching hospital. The timeliness of the discharge summary reaching the general practitioner (GP, family physician) was also assessed based on the 72 h target referenced in the Care Quality Commission report.1 Method: 501 consecutive discharge medication orders from 142 patients were examined and the following records were compared (1) the final inpatient drug chart at the point of discharge, (2) printed signed copy of the initial to take away (TTA) discharge summary produced electronically by the physician, (3) the pharmacist's amendments on the initial TTA that were hand written, (4) the final electronic patient discharge summary record, (5) the patients final take home medication from the hospital. Discrepancies between the physician's order (6) and pharmacist's change(s) (7) were compared with two types of failures – ‘failure to make a required change’ and ‘change where none was required’. Once the patient was discharged, the patient's GP, was contacted 72 h after discharge to see if the patient discharge summary, sent by post or via email, was received. Results: Over half the patients seen (73 out of 142) patients had at least one discrepancy that was made on the initial TTA by the doctor and amended by the pharmacist. Out of the 501 drugs, there were 140 discrepancies, 108 were ‘failures to make a required change’ (77%) and 32 were ‘changes where none were required’ (23%). The types of ‘failures to make required changes’ discrepancies that were found between the initial TTA and pharmacist's amendments were paracetamol and ibuprofen changes (dose banding) 38 (27%), directions of use 34 (24%), incorrect formulation of medication 28 (20%) and incorrect strength 8 (6%). The types of ‘changes where none were required discrepancies’ were omitted medication 15 (11%), unnecessary drug 14 (10%) and incorrect medicine including spelling mistakes 3 (2%). After contacting the GPs of the discharged patients 72 h postdischarge; 49% had received the discharge summary and 45% had not, the remaining 6% were patients who were discharged without a GP. Conclusion: This study shows that doctor prescribing at discharge is often not accurate, and interventions made by pharmacist to reconcile are important at this point of care. It was also found that half the discharge summaries had not reached the patient's family physician (according to the GP) within 72 h.

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

Fabricating reconciliation : Howard's forgettable speech

In this chapter, John Howard’s policy speech to The Sydney Institute, a conservative think tank, on October 11, 2007 as the Australian Prime Minister of the day, is analysed within the frame of discourse analysis to make visible how the speech works in old ways to dress up neoliberal policy as new and reformist. Taking centre stage, Howard pointed to concrete steps undertaken to achieve what he called a “new reconciliation.” This cynical manoeuvre, which put reconciliation back onto the election agenda (after it was earlier derided for its divisive and muddle headed symbolism), constituted a “neoliberal quickstep” (Reiger, 2006) or quickfix of sorts. The speech was also used as a place to reintroduce the Northern Territory Intervention, which at the time was purported to be a response to child abuse and Indigenous community dysfunction.

Romance and Reconciliation : The secret life of indigenous sexuality on Australian television drama

This article examines the representation of Indigenous sexuality on Australian television drama since the 1970s, suggesting the political importance of such representations. In 1976 Justine Saunders became the first regular Indigenous character on an Australian television drama series, as the hairdresser Rhonda Jackson in Number 96. She was presented as sexually attractive, but this was expressed through a rape scene after a party. Twenty five years later, Deborah Mailman starred in The Secret Life of Us, as Kelly, who is also presented as sexually attractive. But her character can be seen in many romantic relationships. The article explores changing representations that moved us from Number 96 to The Secret Life of Us, via The Flying Doctors and Heartland. It suggests that in representations of intimate and loving relationships on screen it has only recently become possible to see hopeful models for interaction between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

Evaluation of contextual influences on the medication administration practice of paediatric nurses

Aim. This paper is a report of a study conducted to explore the impact of preidentified contextual themes (related to work environment and socialization) on nursing medication practice. Background. Medication administration is a complex aspect of paediatric nursing and an important component of day-to-day nursing practice. Many attempts are being made to improve patient safety, but many errors remain. Identifying and understanding factors that influence medication administration errors are of utmost importance. Method. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with a sample of 278 paediatric nurses from the emergency department, intensive care unit and medical and surgical wards of an Australian tertiary paediatric hospital in 2004. The response rate was 67%. Result. Contextual influences were important in determining how closely medication policy was followed. Completed questionnaires were returned by 185 nurses (67%). Younger nurses aged <34 years thought that their medication administration practice could be influenced by the person with whom they checked the drugs (P = 0·001), and that there were daily circumstances when it was acceptable not to adhere strictly to medication policy (P < 0·001), including choosing between following policy and acting in the best interests of the child (P = 0·002). Senior nurses agreed that senior staff dictate acceptable levels of medication policy adherence through role modelling (P = 0·01). Less experienced nurses reported greater confidence with computer literacy (P < 0·001). Conclusions. Organizations need to employ multidisciplinary education programmes to promote universal understanding of, and adherence to, medication policies. Skill mix should be closely monitored to ensure adequate support for new and junior staff.

Factors influencing paediatric nurses' responses to medication administration

Objective: To evaluate the importance of contextual and policy factors on nurses’ judgment about medication administration practice.---------- Design: A questionnaire survey of responses to a number of factorial vignettes in June 2004. These vignettes considered a combination of seven contextual and policy factors that were thought to influence nurses’ judgments relating to medication administration.---------- Participants: 185 (67% of eligible) clinical paediatric nursing staff returned completed questionnaires.--------- Setting: A tertiary paediatric hospital in Brisbane, Australia.---------- Results: Double checking the patient, double checking the drug and checking the legality of the prescription were the three strongest predictors of nurses’ actions regarding medication administration.--------- Conclusions: Policy factors and not contextual factors drive nurses’ judgment in response to hypothetical scenarios.