Effects of an integrated medicines management program on medication appropriateness in hospitalized patients

Purpose. The effects of an integrated medicines management (IMM) program on medication appropriateness are discussed.

An innovative approach to integrated medicines management

To determine whether an increased input by clinical pharmacists at each stage of the patient's hospital journey, from admission through discharge, resulted in an enhanced level of patient care as measured by a number of clinical and economic outcomes.

Intermediate Care: The Role of Medicines Management

Healthcare systems worldwide are facing an unprecedented demographic change as globally, the number of older people will triple to 2 billion by the year 2050. The resulting pressures on acute services have been instrumental in the development of intermediate care (IC) as a new healthcare model, which has its origins in the National Health Service in the UK. IC is an umbrella term for patient services that do not require the resources of a general hospital but are beyond the scope of a traditional primary care team. IC aims to promote timely discharge from hospital, prevent unnecessary hospital admissions and reduce the need for long-term residential care by optimizing functional independence. Various healthcare providers around the world have adopted similar models of care to manage changing healthcare needs. Polypharmacy, along with age-related changes, places older people at an increased risk of adverse drug events, including inappropriate prescribing, which has been shown to be prevalent in this population in other healthcare settings. Medicines management (the practice of maximizing health through optimal use of medicines) of older people has been discussed in the literature in a variety of settings; however, its place within IC is largely unknown. Despite IC being a multidisciplinary healthcare model, there is a lack of evidence to suggest that enhanced pharmaceutical involvement is core to the service provided within IC. This review article highlights the gap in the literature surrounding medicines management within IC and identifies potential solutions aimed at improving patient outcomes in this setting.

“It’s very complicated”: a qualitative study of medicines management in intermediate care facilities in Northern Ireland

Background: Intermediate care (IC) describes a range of services targeted at older people, aimed at preventing unnecessary hospitalisation, promoting faster recovery from illness and maximising independence. Older people are at increased risk of medication-related adverse events, but little is known about the provision of medicines management services in IC facilities. This study aimed to describe the current provision of medicines management services in IC facilities in Northern Ireland (NI) and to explore healthcare workers' (HCWs) and patients' views of, and attitudes towards these services and the IC concept. 

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a constant comparative approach with HCWs and patients from IC facilities in NI. 

Results: Interviews were conducted with 25 HCWs and 18 patients from 12 IC facilities in NI. Three themes were identified: 'concept and reality', 'setting and supply' and 'responsibility and review'. A mismatch between the concept of IC and the reality was evident. The IC facility setting dictated prescribing responsibilities and the supply of medicines, presenting challenges for HCWs. A lack of a standardised approach to responsibility for the provision of medicines management services including clinical review was identified. Whilst pharmacists were not considered part of the multidisciplinary team, most HCWs recognised a need for their input. Medicines management was not a concern for the majority of IC patients. 

Conclusions: Medicines management services are not integral to IC and medicine-related challenges are frequently encountered. Integration of pharmacists into the multidisciplinary team could potentially improve medicines management in IC.

Protocol for the PINCER trial: a cluster randomised trial comparing the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led IT-based intervention with simple feedback in reducing rates of clinically important errors in medicines management in general practices

Background: Medication errors are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in primary care. The aims of this study are to determine the effectiveness, cost effectiveness and acceptability of a pharmacist-led information-technology-based complex intervention compared with simple feedback in reducing proportions of patients at risk from potentially hazardous prescribing and medicines management in general (family) practice. Methods: Research subject group: "At-risk" patients registered with computerised general practices in two geographical regions in England. Design: Parallel group pragmatic cluster randomised trial. Interventions: Practices will be randomised to either: (i) Computer-generated feedback; or (ii) Pharmacist-led intervention comprising of computer-generated feedback, educational outreach and dedicated support. Primary outcome measures: The proportion of patients in each practice at six and 12 months post intervention: - with a computer-recorded history of peptic ulcer being prescribed non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs - with a computer-recorded diagnosis of asthma being prescribed beta-blockers - aged 75 years and older receiving long-term prescriptions for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or loop diuretics without a recorded assessment of renal function and electrolytes in the preceding 15 months. Secondary outcome measures; These relate to a number of other examples of potentially hazardous prescribing and medicines management. Economic analysis: An economic evaluation will be done of the cost per error avoided, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS), comparing the pharmacist-led intervention with simple feedback. Qualitative analysis: A qualitative study will be conducted to explore the views and experiences of health care professionals and NHS managers concerning the interventions, and investigate possible reasons why the interventions prove effective, or conversely prove ineffective. Sample size: 34 practices in each of the two treatment arms would provide at least 80% power (two-tailed alpha of 0.05) to demonstrate a 50% reduction in error rates for each of the three primary outcome measures in the pharmacist-led intervention arm compared with a 11% reduction in the simple feedback arm. Discussion: At the time of submission of this article, 72 general practices have been recruited (36 in each arm of the trial) and the interventions have been delivered. Analysis has not yet been undertaken.

PINCER trial: a cluster randomised trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pharmacist-led IT-based intervention with simple feedback in reducing rates of clinically important errors in medicines management in general practices

Background: Medication errors in general practice are an important source of potentially preventable morbidity and mortality. Building on previous descriptive, qualitative and pilot work, we sought to investigate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and likely generalisability of a complex pharm acist-led IT-based intervention aiming to improve prescribing safety in general practice. Objectives: We sought to: • Test the hypothesis that a pharmacist-led IT-based complex intervention using educational outreach and practical support is more effective than simple feedback in reducing the proportion of patients at risk from errors in prescribing and medicines management in general practice. • Conduct an economic evaluation of the cost per error avoided, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS). • Analyse data recorded by pharmacists, summarising the proportions of patients judged to be at clinical risk, the actions recommended by pharmacists, and actions completed in the practices. • Explore the views and experiences of healthcare professionals and NHS managers concerning the intervention; investigate potential explanations for the observed effects, and inform decisions on the future roll-out of the pharmacist-led intervention • Examine secular trends in the outcome measures of interest allowing for informal comparison between trial practices and practices that did not participate in the trial contributing to the QRESEARCH database. Methods Two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial of 72 English general practices with embedded economic analysis and longitudinal descriptive and qualitative analysis. Informal comparison of the trial findings with a national descriptive study investigating secular trends undertaken using data from practices contributing to the QRESEARCH database. The main outcomes of interest were prescribing errors and medication monitoring errors at six- and 12-months following the intervention. Results: Participants in the pharmacist intervention arm practices were significantly less likely to have been prescribed a non-selective NSAID without a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) if they had a history of peptic ulcer (OR 0.58, 95%CI 0.38, 0.89), to have been prescribed a beta-blocker if they had asthma (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58, 0.91) or (in those aged 75 years and older) to have been prescribed an ACE inhibitor or diuretic without a measurement of urea and electrolytes in the last 15 months (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34, 0.78). The economic analysis suggests that the PINCER pharmacist intervention has 95% probability of being cost effective if the decision-maker’s ceiling willingness to pay reaches £75 (6 months) or £85 (12 months) per error avoided. The intervention addressed an issue that was important to professionals and their teams and was delivered in a way that was acceptable to practices with minimum disruption of normal work processes. Comparison of the trial findings with changes seen in QRESEARCH practices indicated that any reductions achieved in the simple feedback arm were likely, in the main, to have been related to secular trends rather than the intervention. Conclusions Compared with simple feedback, the pharmacist-led intervention resulted in reductions in proportions of patients at risk of prescribing and monitoring errors for the primary outcome measures and the composite secondary outcome measures at six-months and (with the exception of the NSAID/peptic ulcer outcome measure) 12-months post-intervention. The intervention is acceptable to pharmacists and practices, and is likely to be seen as costeffective by decision makers.

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.

Medicines management strategies to improve antibiotic prescribing

A systematic review was conducted to explicitly identify interventions that alone, or in combination, were effective in improving antibiotic prescribing. The citation search strategy used in the present review provided a database of 365077 studies, of which only twenty-five were included in the final review (“review studies”). Analysis of the interventions used within the review studies indicated that a combination of “guidelines” and “pharmacy” interventions have the greatest potential to improve antibiotic prescribing. Two types of qualitative research were conducted, semi-structured interviews and the collection of naturally occurring data. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in order to determine NHS managers? perceptions of current policies used to improve antibiotic prescribing within selected Primary Care Trusts and highlighted the importance of pharmacy intervention, formularies or guidelines and improved prescribing analysis (IT based intervention) on improving antibiotic prescribing. This was supported by the collection of naturally occurring data, which was used to provide further insight into interventions used to improve antibiotic prescribing. The Specialist Antibiotic Pharmacist (HD) produced and implemented an innovative electronic antibiotic prescribing analysis tool (the Antibiotic Database) to analyse and improve antibiotic prescribing in a consistent manner. The key advantage of the Antibiotic Database was the time and money saved on producing visual electronic outputs containing an inaccurate outcome measure or time period for analysis. The results concluded that an IT based intervention, such as the Antibiotic Database should be used, in addition to the use of antibiotic guidelines and pharmacy intervention, within all sectors of the NHS in order to improve antibiotic prescribing and its analysis.

A comparison of antibiotic prescribing indicators and medicines management scoring in secondary care

Poster: - Robust prescribing indicators analogous to those used in primary care are not available currently in NHS hospital trusts - The Department of Health has recently implemented a scheme for self-assessment scoring medicines management processes (maximum 23) in NHS hospitals - There is no clear relationship between average values for two antibiotic prescribing indicators obtained in ten NHS hospital trusts in the West Midlands - There is no clear relationship between either indicator value and the corresponding self-assessment medicines management score - This study highlights the difficulties involved in assessing the medicines management processes in NHS hospitals; better medicines management evaluation systems are needed