Effectiveness of Clinical Pharmacists-Led Medication Reconciliation to Prevent Medication Discrepancies in Hospitalized Patients: A Non-Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 2.1 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice Pub Date : 2024-07-19 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/IPRP.S467157
Maram M Elamin, Kannan O Ahmed, Mirghani Yousif
{"title":"Effectiveness of Clinical Pharmacists-Led Medication Reconciliation to Prevent Medication Discrepancies in Hospitalized Patients: A Non-Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Maram M Elamin, Kannan O Ahmed, Mirghani Yousif","doi":"10.2147/IPRP.S467157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Medication discrepancies are a major safety concern for hospitalized patients and healthcare professionals. Medication Reconciliation (MR) is a widely used tool in different practice settings to ensure the proper use of medications.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the clinical pharmacists-led MR process in identifying, preventing, and resolving medication discrepancies among hospitalized patients.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This was a prospective study with an observational and interventional part, conducted at the Internal Medicine Department of a tertiary Hospital in Sudan from January to September 2023. The enrolled patients were divided into two groups, the observation group, in which the routine MR process was performed by doctors (usual care), and the intervention group, in which clinical pharmacists led the MR process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to the usual care, the clinical pharmacists were more efficient in identifying and preventing medication discrepancies (P=0.001). From a total of 1012 medications, clinical pharmacists' interventions contributed to the detection of (39%) equivalent to 2.2 discrepancies per patient, resolving 325 (83%) and preventing (55%) clinically significant discrepancies. Dose discrepancy (43%) was the most common type of identified discrepancies. These interventions were accepted by (98%) of doctors and implemented in (86%) of the total cases. The main predictors of medication discrepancies (P ≤0.05) for patients were the length of hospital stay, patient-hospital transfer, high number of medication histories, and increased number of medications used during hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Through the implementation of the MR process, the clinical pharmacist's interventions substantially contributed to the detection and resolution of medication discrepancies among hospitalized patients. It is recommended that this intervention be disseminated in more hospitals in Sudan to encourage the implementation of appropriate practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":45655,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11268761/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S467157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Medication discrepancies are a major safety concern for hospitalized patients and healthcare professionals. Medication Reconciliation (MR) is a widely used tool in different practice settings to ensure the proper use of medications.

Objective: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the clinical pharmacists-led MR process in identifying, preventing, and resolving medication discrepancies among hospitalized patients.

Patients and methods: This was a prospective study with an observational and interventional part, conducted at the Internal Medicine Department of a tertiary Hospital in Sudan from January to September 2023. The enrolled patients were divided into two groups, the observation group, in which the routine MR process was performed by doctors (usual care), and the intervention group, in which clinical pharmacists led the MR process.

Results: Compared to the usual care, the clinical pharmacists were more efficient in identifying and preventing medication discrepancies (P=0.001). From a total of 1012 medications, clinical pharmacists' interventions contributed to the detection of (39%) equivalent to 2.2 discrepancies per patient, resolving 325 (83%) and preventing (55%) clinically significant discrepancies. Dose discrepancy (43%) was the most common type of identified discrepancies. These interventions were accepted by (98%) of doctors and implemented in (86%) of the total cases. The main predictors of medication discrepancies (P ≤0.05) for patients were the length of hospital stay, patient-hospital transfer, high number of medication histories, and increased number of medications used during hospitalization.

Conclusion: Through the implementation of the MR process, the clinical pharmacist's interventions substantially contributed to the detection and resolution of medication discrepancies among hospitalized patients. It is recommended that this intervention be disseminated in more hospitals in Sudan to encourage the implementation of appropriate practices.

临床药剂师指导用药协调对防止住院患者用药差异的效果:非随机对照试验。
目的:用药差异是住院病人和医护人员的一大安全隐患。药物调配(MR)是不同实践环境中广泛使用的一种工具,可确保药物的正确使用:本研究旨在评估临床药师主导的 MR 流程在识别、预防和解决住院患者用药差异方面的有效性:这是一项前瞻性研究,分为观察和干预两部分,于 2023 年 1 月至 9 月在苏丹一家三级医院的内科进行。入组患者被分为两组,观察组和干预组,前者由医生执行常规 MR 流程(常规护理),后者由临床药师主导 MR 流程:与常规护理相比,临床药师在识别和预防用药差异方面更有效率(P=0.001)。在总共 1012 种药物中,临床药师的干预帮助发现了(39%)相当于每位患者 2.2 种差异,解决了(83%)325 种差异,预防了(55%)具有临床意义的差异。剂量差异(43%)是最常见的差异类型。这些干预措施得到了(98%)医生的认可,并在(86%)所有病例中得到实施。患者用药差异的主要预测因素(P≤0.05)是住院时间长、患者转院、用药记录多以及住院期间用药次数增加:通过实施 MR 流程,临床药师的干预措施极大地促进了住院患者用药差异的发现和解决。建议在苏丹更多的医院推广这一干预措施,以鼓励实施适当的做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
3.40%
发文量
29
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信