Assessing and Reporting the Adverse Effects of Antipsychotic Medication: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies, and Prospective, Retrospective, and Cross-Sectional Research

Objective: Adverse effects (AEs) of antipsychotic medication have important implications for patients and prescribers in terms of wellbeing, treatment adherence and quality of life. This review summarises strategies for collecting and reporting AE data across a representative literature sample to ascertain their rigour and comprehensiveness. Methods: A PsycINFO search, following PRISMA Statement guidelines, was conducted in English-language journals (1980–July 2014) using the following search string: (antipsychotic* OR neuroleptic*) AND (subjective effect OR subjective experience OR subjective response OR subjective mental alterations OR subjective tolerability OR subjective wellbeing OR patient perspective OR self-rated effects OR adverse effects OR side-effects). Of 7,825 articles, 384 were retained that reported quantified results for AEs of typical or atypical antipsychotics amongst transdiagnostic adult, adolescent, and child populations. Information extracted included: types of AEs reported; how AEs were assessed; assessment duration; assessment of the global impact of antipsychotic consumption on wellbeing; and conflict of interest due to industry sponsorship. Results: Neurological, metabolic, and sedation-related cognitive effects were reported most systematically relative to affective, anticholinergic, autonomic, cutaneous, hormonal, miscellaneous, and non-sedative cognitive effects. The impact of AEs on patient wellbeing was poorly assessed. Cross-sectional and prospective research designs yielded more comprehensive data about AE severity and prevalence than clinical or observational retrospective studies. 3 Conclusions: AE detection and classification can be improved through the use of standardised assessment instruments and consideration of subjective patient impact. Observational research can supplement information from clinical trials to improve the ecological validity of AE data.

Compliance measurement-guided medication management programs in hypertension : a systematic review

Objectif principal: Il n’est pas démontré que les interventions visant à maîtriser voire modérer la médicamentation de patients atteints d’hypertension peuvent améliorer leur gestion de la maladie. Cette revue systématique propose d’évaluer les programmes de gestion contrôlée de la médicamentation pour l’hypertension, en s’appuyant sur la mesure de l’observance des traitements par les patients (CMGM). Design: Revue systématique. Sources de données: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, résumés de conférences internationales sur l’hypertension et bibliographies des articles pertinents. Méthodes: Des essais contrôlés randomisés (ECR) et des études observationnelles (EO) ont été évalués par 2 réviseurs indépendants. L’évaluation de la qualité (de ce matériel) a été réalisée avec l’aide de l’outil de Cochrane de mesure du risque de biais, et a été estimée selon une échelle à quatre niveaux de qualité Une synthèse narrative des données a été effectuée en raison de l'hétérogénéité importante des études. Résultats: 13 études (8 ECR, 5 EO) de 2150 patients hypertendus ont été prises en compte. Parmi elles, 5 études de CMGM avec l’utilisation de dispositifs électroniques comme seule intervention ont relevé une diminution de la tension artérielle (TA), qui pourrait cependant être expliquée par les biais de mesure. L’amélioration à court terme de la TA sous CMGM dans les interventions complexes a été révélée dans 4 études à qualité faible ou modérée. Dans 4 autres études sur les soins intégrés de qualité supérieure, il n'a pas été possible de distinguer l'impact de la composante CMGM, celle-ci pouvant être compromise par des traitements médicamenteux. L’ensemble des études semble par ailleurs montrer qu’un feed-back régulier au médecin traitant peut être un élément essentiel d’efficacité des traitements CMGM, et peut être facilement assuré par une infirmière ou un pharmacien, grâce à des outils de communication appropriés. Conclusions: Aucune preuve convaincante de l'efficacité des traitements CMGM comme technologie de la santé n’a été établie en raison de designs non-optimaux des études identifiées et des ualités méthodologiques insatisfaisantes de celles-ci. Les recherches futures devraient : suivre les normes de qualité approuvées et les recommandations cliniques actuelles pour le traitement de l'hypertension, inclure des groupes spécifiques de patients avec des problèmes d’attachement aux traitements, et considérer les résultats cliniques et économiques de l'organisation de soins ainsi que les observations rapportées par les patients.

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.

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.^

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. ^

Medication errors in older people with mental health problems:a review

Objective - To review and summarise published data on medication errors in older people with mental health problems. Methods - A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that investigated medication errors in older people with mental health problems. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PHARMLINE, COCHRANE COLLABORATION and PsycINFO were searched electronically. Any studies identified were scrutinized for further references. The title, abstract or full text was systematically reviewed for relevance. Results - Data were extracted from eight studies. In total, information about 728 errors (459 administration, 248 prescribing, 7 dispensing, 12 transcribing, 2 unclassified) was available. The dataset related almost exclusively to inpatients, frequently involved non-psychotropics, and the majority of the errors were not serious. Conclusions - Due to methodology issues it was impossible to calculate overall error rates. Future research should concentrate on serious errors within community settings, and clarify potential risk factors.

A review of the information-gathering process for the provision of medicines for self-medication via community pharmacies in developing countries

Background: Currently, no review has been completed regarding the information-gathering process for the provision of medicines for self-medication in community pharmacies in developing countries. Objective: To review the rate of information gathering and the types of information gathered when patients present for self-medication requests. Methods: Six databases were searched for studies that described the rate of information gathering and/or the types of information gathered in the provision of medicines for self-medication in community pharmacies in developing countries. The types of information reported were classified as: signs and symptoms, patient identity, action taken, medications, medical history, and others. Results: Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Variations in the study populations, types of scenarios, research methods, and data reporting were observed. The reported rate of information gathering varied from 18% to 97%, depending on the research methods used. Information on signs and symptoms and patient identity was more frequently reported to be gathered compared with information on action taken, medications, and medical history. Conclusion: Evidence showed that the information-gathering process for the provision of medicines for self-medication via community pharmacies in developing countries is inconsistent. There is a need to determine the barriers to appropriate information-gathering practice as well as to develop strategies to implement effective information-gathering processes. It is also recommended that international and national pharmacy organizations, including pharmacy academics and pharmacy researchers, develop a consensus on the types of information that should be reported in the original studies. This will facilitate comparison across studies so that areas that need improvement can be identified. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.

Medication errors in mental healthcare:a systematic review

Methods: It has been estimated that medication error harms 1-2% of patients admitted to general hospitals. There has been no previous systematic review of the incidence, cause or type of medication error in mental healthcare services. Methods: A systematic literature search for studies that examined the incidence or cause of medication error in one or more stage(s) of the medication-management process in the setting of a community or hospital-based mental healthcare service was undertaken. The results in the context of the design of the study and the denominator used were examined. Results: All studies examined medication management processes, as opposed to outcomes. The reported rate of error was highest in studies that retrospectively examined drug charts, intermediate in those that relied on reporting by pharmacists to identify error and lowest in those that relied on organisational incident reporting systems. Only a few of the errors identified by the studies caused actual harm, mostly because they were detected and remedial action was taken before the patient received the drug. The focus of the research was on inpatients and prescriptions dispensed by mental health pharmacists. Conclusion: Research about medication error in mental healthcare is limited. In particular, very little is known about the incidence of error in non-hospital settings or about the harm caused by it. Evidence is available from other sources that a substantial number of adverse drug events are caused by psychotropic drugs. Some of these are preventable and might probably, therefore, be due to medication error. On the basis of this and features of the organisation of mental healthcare that might predispose to medication error, priorities for future research are suggested.

Systematic review investigating the reporting of comorbidities and medication in randomized controlled trials of people with dementia

Objectives: dementia is a debilitating condition characterised by global loss of cognitive and intellectual functioning, which reduces social and occupational performance. This population frequently presents with medical co-morbidities such as hypertension, cardiovascular disease and diabetes. The CONSORT statement outlines recommended guidance on reporting of participant characteristics in clinical trials. It is, however, unclear how much these are adhered to in trials assessing people with dementia. This paper assesses the reporting of medical co-morbidities and prescribed medications for people with dementia within randomised controlled trial (RCT) reports. Design: a systematic review of the published literature from the databases AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Clinical Trial Registry from 1 January 1997 to 9 January 2014 was undertaken in order to identify RCTs detailing baseline medical co-morbidities and prescribed medications . Eligible studies were appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) RCT appraisal tool, and descriptive statistical analyses were calculated to determine point prevalence. Results: nine trials, including 1474 people with dementia, were identified presenting medical co-morbidity data. These indicated neurological disorders ( prevalence 91%), vascular disorders (prevalence 91%), cardiac disorders ( prevalence 74%) and ischaemic cerebrovascular disease ( prevalence 53%) were most frequently seen. Conclusions: published RCTs poorly report medical co-morbidities and medications for people with dementia. Future trials should include the report of these items to allow interpretation of whether the results are generalisable to frailer older populations.

Medication discrepancies at transitions in pediatrics:a review of the literature

Medication reconciliation is an important process in reducing medication errors in many countries. Canada, the USA, and UK have incorporated medication reconciliation as a priority area for national patient safety initiatives and goals. The UK national guidance excludes the pediatric population. The aim of this review was to explore the occurrence of medication discrepancies in the pediatric population. The primary objective was to identify studies reporting the rate and clinical significance of the discrepancies and the secondary objective was to ascertain whether any specific interventions have been used for medication reconciliation in pediatric settings. The following electronic bibliographic databases were used to identify studies: PubMed, OVID EMBASE (1980 to 2012 week 1), ISI Web of Science, ISI Biosis, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and OVID International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to January 2012). Primary studies were identified that observed medication discrepancies in children under 18 years of age upon hospital admission, transfer and discharge, or had reported medication reconciliation interventions. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts for relevant articles and extracted data using pre-defined data fields, including risk of bias assessment. Ten studies were identified with variances in reportage of stage and rate of discrepancies. Studies were heterogeneous in definitions, methods, and patient populations. Most studies related to admissions and reported consistently high rates of discrepancies ranging from 22 to 72.3 % of patients (sample size ranging from 23 to 272). Seven of the studies were low-quality observational studies and three studies were 'grey literature' non-peer reviewed conference abstracts. Studies involving small numbers of patients have shown that medication discrepancies occur at all transitions of care in children. Further research is required to investigate and demonstrate how implementing medication reconciliation can reduce discrepancies and potential patient harm. © 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland.

The feasibility of determining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medication organisation devices compared with usual care for older people in a community setting : systematic review, stakeholder focus groups and feasibility randomised controlled trial

This project was funded by National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 50. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Systematic review of the health and societal effects of medication organisation devices

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank, Estelle Payerne (article screening, data extraction and bias assessment); Trish Boyton (article retrieval and screening) and Laura Cawley (search terms and title screening) for their invaluable help in conducting this systematic review. Funding The research was funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon hospital admission in children - a systematic review

Objectives: NICE/NPSA excluded children under 16 from their guidance concerning medicines reconciliation (MR) upon admission.1 Our aims and objectives of conducting the literature review was to identify the epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon admission, transfer and discharge in children, and if they require MR. Method: Six bibliographical databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science and Biosis Previews) and selected key words were used to find epidemiological studies on medication discrepancies in children upon hospital admission, transfer and discharge (key words included ‘medication discrepancy’; ‘medication reconciliation’; ‘hospital admission’; ‘hospital discharge’; ‘hospital transfer’); studies where the data for children could be extracted were included. Results: From the 1239 articles found (in May 2011), eight of the articles had extractable paediatric information, (five from Canada, two from USA, one from UK). Five of the studies involved discrepancies on admission, one involved discrepancies on admission and transfer, one involved discrepancies at transfer and one considered discharge. The reference point used to compare against the admission, transfer and the discharge order differed in each of the studies. Four studies used a rating scale to assess the clinical significance of the discrepancies to demonstrate the potential adverse clinical outcome of patients in the absence of clinical intervention. Two studies2 3 used a rating scale that was used in adults.4 A study of paediatric neurosurgical patients found that initial hospital prescriptions for children differed from the preadmission prescriptions in 39% of occasions and 50% of all prescribing variations had the potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.2 A study by Coffey et al in general paediatric admissions in Canada showed 22% of patients experienced at least one discrepancy and 29% of the discrepancies had the potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.3 By comparison an epidemiological study in discrepancies in adults on admission had 38.6% of the discrepancies identified with a potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.4 All the studies involved small samples or specific patient groups such as medically complex patients. However all of the studies demonstrated that discrepancies occurred among paediatric populations during transitions in care settings and mentioned MR as an intervention. Conclusion: The results have shown that discrepancies of medication upon hospital admission, transfer and discharge occur regularly in children. With only one published study in the UK looking at hospital admission in children, and no published articles on the incidence and epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon hospital transfer or discharge further research is required in a wider paediatric population. Further work is also required to define the required interventions to improve practice.

The association between anticholinergic medication burden and health related outcomes in the ‘oldest old’: A systematic review of the literature

Background: Increased exposure to anticholinergic medication is problematic, particularly in those aged 80 years and older.

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to identify tools used to quantify anticholinergic medication burden and determine the most appropriate tool for use in longitudinal research, conducted in those aged 80 years and older.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted across six electronic databases to identify existing tools. Data extraction was conducted independently by two researchers; studies describing the development of each tool were also retrieved and relevant data extracted. An assessment of quality was completed for all studies. Tools were assessed in terms of their measurement of the association between anticholinergic medication burden and a defined set of clinical outcomes, their development and their suitability for use in longitudinal research; the latter was evaluated on the basis of criteria defined as the key attributes of an ideal anticholinergic risk tool.

Results: In total, 807 papers were retrieved, 13 studies were eligible for inclusion and eight tools were identified. Included studies were classed as ‘very good’ or ‘good’ following the quality assessment analysis; one study was unclassified. Anticholinergic medication burden as measured in studies was associated with impaired cognitive and physical function, as well as an increased frequency of falls. The Drug Burden Index (DBI) exhibited most of the key attributes of an ideal anticholinergic risk tool.

Conclusion: This review identified the DBI as the most appropriate tool for use in longitudinal research focused on older people and their exposure to anticholinergic medication burden.