{"title":"Determining Adherence to Inhaled Corticosteroids From the Epic Electronic Medical Record.","authors":"Ashley Galbreath, Anzeela Schentrup, Sreekala Prabhakaran, Dawn Baker, Alicia Hardy, Leslie Hendeles","doi":"10.5863/1551-6776-29.1.45","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Often we call the patient's pharmacy to obtain a refill history to assess inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) adherence. The purpose of this project was to determine the accuracy of refill histories for ICS (with or without long-acting beta agonist) listed in Epic's Medication Dispense History.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated 61 patients and used data from 38 who met the following criteria: 1) under the care of the UF Pediatric Severe Asthma Clinic; 2) taking the same dose of the same ICS product for 6 months before the patient's last clinic visit; and 3) having data available from the pharmacy where the last ICS prescription was electronically sent. We called the pharmacies to obtain a verbal report of their refill record. Then, we compared the number of refills reported to the number listed in Epic's records using a Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 293 refill dates listed in Epic, 157 were duplicates, giving a 54% error. After deleting duplicates, the mean (SD) number of refills listed in Epic was 3.6 (2.0) compared with 3.3 (2.0) in pharmacies over a period of 6 months (p < 0.0001). After removing duplicates Epic correctly reported the total number of refills for 30 of the 38 patients (78.9%). Seven of the remaining patients had more refills listed in Epic while 1 patient had more refills dispensed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study indicates that our version of Epic over-reports refills thus limiting assessment of adherence. In contrast, absence of refills in Epic is a clear indication of poor adherence.</p>","PeriodicalId":37484,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10849692/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5863/1551-6776-29.1.45","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Often we call the patient's pharmacy to obtain a refill history to assess inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) adherence. The purpose of this project was to determine the accuracy of refill histories for ICS (with or without long-acting beta agonist) listed in Epic's Medication Dispense History.
Methods: We evaluated 61 patients and used data from 38 who met the following criteria: 1) under the care of the UF Pediatric Severe Asthma Clinic; 2) taking the same dose of the same ICS product for 6 months before the patient's last clinic visit; and 3) having data available from the pharmacy where the last ICS prescription was electronically sent. We called the pharmacies to obtain a verbal report of their refill record. Then, we compared the number of refills reported to the number listed in Epic's records using a Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test.
Results: Of the 293 refill dates listed in Epic, 157 were duplicates, giving a 54% error. After deleting duplicates, the mean (SD) number of refills listed in Epic was 3.6 (2.0) compared with 3.3 (2.0) in pharmacies over a period of 6 months (p < 0.0001). After removing duplicates Epic correctly reported the total number of refills for 30 of the 38 patients (78.9%). Seven of the remaining patients had more refills listed in Epic while 1 patient had more refills dispensed.
Conclusion: This study indicates that our version of Epic over-reports refills thus limiting assessment of adherence. In contrast, absence of refills in Epic is a clear indication of poor adherence.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics is the official journal of the Pediatric Pharmacy Advocacy Group. JPPT is a peer-reviewed multi disciplinary journal that is devoted to promoting the safe and effective use of medications in infants and children. To this end, the journal publishes practical information for all practitioners who provide care to pediatric patients. Each issue includes review articles, original clinical investigations, case reports, editorials, and other information relevant to pediatric medication therapy. The Journal focuses all work on issues related to the practice of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics. The scope of content includes pharmacotherapy, extemporaneous compounding, dosing, methods of medication administration, medication error prevention, and legislative issues. The Journal will contain original research, review articles, short subjects, case reports, clinical investigations, editorials, and news from such organizations as the Pediatric Pharmacy Advocacy Group, the FDA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, and so on.