[Impact of pharmaceutical care in polymedicated patients admitted to a geriatric ward].

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
R Marín-Gorricho, C Lozano, C Torres, E Ramalle-Gómara, M F Hurtado-Gómez, R Pérez-Zuazo, J Molpeceres-García Del Pozo
{"title":"[Impact of pharmaceutical care in polymedicated patients admitted to a geriatric ward].","authors":"R Marín-Gorricho,&nbsp;C Lozano,&nbsp;C Torres,&nbsp;E Ramalle-Gómara,&nbsp;M F Hurtado-Gómez,&nbsp;R Pérez-Zuazo,&nbsp;J Molpeceres-García Del Pozo","doi":"10.23938/ASSN.0990","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of the study was estimate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and drug related problems (DRP) in an acute geriatric ward, and to evaluate the impact of pharmaceutical intervention on their prevalence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Quasi-experimental, interventional study in polymedicated patients (= 6 drugs) who were admitted to a Geriatric ward in 2018-2019. PIP were analyzed according to STOPP/START 2014 criteria and DRP on the Third Consensus of Granada. The PIP and DRP detected, and the possible actions to correct them, were sent to the physician in charge. The effect of the intervention was analyzed at hospital discharge; if the change of prevalence of PIP and DRP was =75%, the pharmaceutical intervention was considered to be accepted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pharmaceutical intervention was performed on 218 patients, analyzing 1,837 prescriptions. On admission, PIP (90.8%) and DRP (99.5%) were observed. We carried out 1,227 interventions, 57.6% on DRP. More than half (53.6%) of the pharmaceutical interventions were accepted; the PIP according to the STOPP and START criteria was reduced by 49.7 and 22.1%, respectively; DRP decreased by 60.1%. The frequencies and medians of PRM and PPI according to the START and STOPP criteria decreased significantly at discharge. The variables most frequently associated with acceptance of the pharmaceutical intervention were the geriatrician at charge, the number of PPI START and the number of PPI STOPP.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The detection of PIP and DRP of chronic treatment during hospital admission by the pharmacist, and in collaboration with the patient's doctor, helps to reduce the prevalence of PIP and DRP.</p>","PeriodicalId":7775,"journal":{"name":"Anales Del Sistema Sanitario De Navarra","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/77/bb/assn-45-01-e0990.PMC10114036.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anales Del Sistema Sanitario De Navarra","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23938/ASSN.0990","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was estimate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and drug related problems (DRP) in an acute geriatric ward, and to evaluate the impact of pharmaceutical intervention on their prevalence.

Methods: Quasi-experimental, interventional study in polymedicated patients (= 6 drugs) who were admitted to a Geriatric ward in 2018-2019. PIP were analyzed according to STOPP/START 2014 criteria and DRP on the Third Consensus of Granada. The PIP and DRP detected, and the possible actions to correct them, were sent to the physician in charge. The effect of the intervention was analyzed at hospital discharge; if the change of prevalence of PIP and DRP was =75%, the pharmaceutical intervention was considered to be accepted.

Results: Pharmaceutical intervention was performed on 218 patients, analyzing 1,837 prescriptions. On admission, PIP (90.8%) and DRP (99.5%) were observed. We carried out 1,227 interventions, 57.6% on DRP. More than half (53.6%) of the pharmaceutical interventions were accepted; the PIP according to the STOPP and START criteria was reduced by 49.7 and 22.1%, respectively; DRP decreased by 60.1%. The frequencies and medians of PRM and PPI according to the START and STOPP criteria decreased significantly at discharge. The variables most frequently associated with acceptance of the pharmaceutical intervention were the geriatrician at charge, the number of PPI START and the number of PPI STOPP.

Conclusion: The detection of PIP and DRP of chronic treatment during hospital admission by the pharmacist, and in collaboration with the patient's doctor, helps to reduce the prevalence of PIP and DRP.

[在老年病房接受多种药物治疗的患者中药学服务的影响]。
背景:本研究的目的是估计急性老年病房潜在不适当处方(PIP)和药物相关问题(DRP)的患病率,并评估药物干预对其患病率的影响。方法:对2018-2019年入住老年病房的多药患者(= 6种药物)进行准实验、介入性研究。根据STOPP/START 2014标准和格拉纳达第三共识的DRP分析PIP。检测到的PIP和DRP以及可能的纠正措施被发送给负责的医生。出院时对干预效果进行分析;如果PIP和DRP患病率的变化=75%,则认为药物干预是可以接受的。结果:对218例患者进行药物干预,分析处方1837张。入院时,观察到PIP(90.8%)和DRP(99.5%)。我们进行了1227项干预,其中57.6%为DRP干预。超过一半(53.6%)的药物干预措施被接受;根据STOPP和START标准的PIP分别下降49.7%和22.1%;DRP下降了60.1%。根据START和STOPP标准,PRM和PPI的频率和中位数在放电时显著下降。最常与接受药物干预相关的变量是负责的老年医生、PPI START的数量和PPI stop的数量。结论:药师在住院期间检测慢性治疗患者的PIP和DRP,并与患者的医生合作,有助于降低PIP和DRP的患病率。
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
Anales Del Sistema Sanitario De Navarra
Anales Del Sistema Sanitario De Navarra 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
30.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: La revista Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra es una revista de contenido médico sanitario de carácter generalista. En ella tienen cabida artículos referidos a temas de salud/enfermedad en general, salud pública, administración y gestión sanitaria y Atención Primaria de salud.
×
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