Introduction of an Ambulatory Care Medication Reconciliation Service in Dialysis Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah S. Alghanem ◽  
Tania Bayoud ◽  
Sameer Taher ◽  
Mai Al-Hazami ◽  
Nasser Al-Kandari ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 73 (22) ◽  
pp. 1813-1814 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey L. Schnipper ◽  
Stephanie Labonville

2017 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo-Anne S Wilson ◽  
Matthew A Ladda ◽  
Jaclyn Tran ◽  
Marsha Wood ◽  
Penelope Poyah ◽  
...  

<p><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Ambulatory medication reconciliation can reduce the frequency of medication discrepancies and may also reduce adverse drug events. Patients receiving dialysis are at high risk for medication discrepancies because they typically have multiple comorbid conditions, are taking many medications, and are receiving care from many practitioners. Little is known about the potential benefits of ambulatory medication reconciliation for these patients.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the number, type, and potential level of harm associated with medication discrepancies identified through ambulatory medication reconciliation and to ascertain the views of community pharmacists and family physicians about this service.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study involved patients initiating hemodialysis who received ambulatory medication reconciliation in a hospital renal program over the period July 2014 to July 2016. Discrepanciesidentified on the medication reconciliation forms for study patients were extracted and categorized by discrepancy type and potential level of harm. The level of harm was determined independently by a pharmacist and a nurse practitioner using a defined scoring system. In the event of disagreement, a nephrologist determined the final score. Surveys were sent to 52 community pharmacists and 44 family physicians involved in the care of study patients to collect their opinions and perspectives on ambulatory medication reconciliation.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> Ambulatory medication reconciliation was conducted 296 times for a total of 147 hemodialysis patients. The mean number of discrepancies identified per patient was 1.31 (standard deviation 2.00). Overall, 30% of these discrepancies were deemed to have the potential to cause moderate to severe patient discomfort or clinical deterioration. Survey results indicated that community practitioners found ambulatory medication reconciliation valuable for providing quality care to dialysis patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study has provided evidence that ambulatory medication reconciliation can increase patient safety and potentially prevent adverse events associated with medication discrepancies.</p><p><strong>RÉSUMÉ</strong></p><p><strong>Contexte : </strong>Le bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires peut réduire les divergences au chapitre des médicaments et les événements indésirables liés aux médicaments. Les divergences relatives aux médicaments représentent un risque élevé pour les patients dialysés, car ils souffrent normalement de multiples troubles comorbides, ils prennent souvent de nombreux médicaments et ils sont soignés par bon nombre de praticiens. Peu d’information existe sur les possibles avantages du bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires pour ces patients.</p><p><strong>Objectifs : </strong>Déterminer le nombre et la catégorie des divergences concernant les médicaments constatées lors d’un bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires ainsi que la gravité potentielle des préjudices consécutifs. De plus, établir la position des pharmaciens communautaires et des médecins de famille sur cette modalité du bilan comparatif des médicaments.</p><p><strong>Méthodes : </strong>La présente étude de cohorte rétrospective a été menée auprès de patients amorçant un traitement par hémodialyse pour qui un bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires a été réalisé dans le cadre d’un programme hospitalier des maladies du rein, entre juillet 2014 et juillet 2016. Les divergences trouvées dans les formulaires de bilan comparatif des médicaments ont été classées par catégorie et selon la gravité potentielle des préjudices. Le niveau du préjudice a été déterminé de manière indépendante par un pharmacien et un membre du personnel infirmier praticien à l’aide d’un système de notation défini. En cas de désaccord, le score final était établi par un néphrologue. Des sondages ont été envoyés à 52 pharmaciens communautaires et à 44 médecins de famille prodiguant des soins aux participants afin qu’ils expriment leurs opinions et leurs points de vue sur le bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires.</p><p><strong>Résultats : </strong>En tout, 296 bilans comparatifs des médicaments en soins ambulatoires ont été effectués auprès de 147 patients hémodialysés. Le nombre moyen de divergences constatées par patient était de 1,31 (écart-type de 2,00). Dans l’ensemble, 30 % de ces divergences ont été considérées comme une source potentielle d’un inconfort allant de modéré à grave ou de dégradation clinique. Selon les résultats du sondage, les praticiens communautaires ont jugé le bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires utile à la prestation de soins de qualité aux patients dialysés.</p><p><strong>Conclusions : </strong>D’après les résultats de l’étude, le bilan comparatif des médicaments en soins ambulatoires augmenterait la sécurité des patients et pourrait prévenir les événements indésirables liés aux divergences relatives aux médicaments.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laney K Jones ◽  
Vanessa Duboski ◽  
Katrina M. Romagnoli ◽  
Alison Flango ◽  
Jami Marks ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction. Improper medication reconciliation can result in inaccurate medication lists which can lead to adverse events including hospitalizations. Interventions targeting medication reconciliation have had varying levels of success. To improve medication reconciliation practices in our ambulatory care clinics, we developed an educational program for clinic personnel. The objective of this study is to describe the educational program, its implementation in a healthcare system, pharmacist and clinic personnel perception of the program, and its impact on clinic personnel knowledge and practice. Methods. Guided by the Conceptual Model of Implementation Research, we conducted an evaluation of a pharmacist-led educational program on evidence-based practices for medication reconciliation by examining implementation outcomes. The implementation outcomes measured include penetration, fidelity, acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and adoption. Data was collected through direct observations, administrative data, pre- and post-surveys, and semi-structured interviews. Results. A total of 37/46 (80%) primary care sites implemented the pharmacist delivered medication reconciliation education from April to June 2021 with representation from each of Geisinger’s regions. Ten (27%) clinic sites completed the medication reconciliation educational program as originally designed, with the remainder adapting the program. A total of 296 clinic personnel completed the pre-survey, while 178 completed the post-survey. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between clinic personnel who completed the pre- vs. post-survey. Interviews were completed with 11 clinic personnel who attended the educational program and 4 pharmacists who delivered the educational program. All clinic personnel interviewed felt satisfied with the educational program and felt it was appropriate since it directly impacted their job. While clinic personnel felt the educational program was acceptable and appropriate, two major concerns were discussed: lack of patient knowledge about their medications and lack of time to complete the medication reconciliation. We found the adherence rate to the elements of the medication reconciliation which were covered in the education program ranged from 0% to 95% in the 55 observations conducted.Conclusion. An educational program for medication reconciliation was found to be acceptable and appropriate but was often adapted to fit site specific needs. Additional barriers affected adoption of best practices and should be addressed in future studies. Trial registration. N/A


2007 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 1523-1526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen D. Persell ◽  
Chandra Y. Osborn ◽  
Robert Richard ◽  
Silvia Skripkauskas ◽  
Michael S. Wolf

2016 ◽  
Vol 73 (22) ◽  
pp. 1845-1857 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa McCarthy ◽  
Xinru (Wendy) Su ◽  
Natalie Crown ◽  
Jennifer Turple ◽  
Thomas E. R. Brown ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 402-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
C L Nassaralla ◽  
J M Naessens ◽  
V L Hunt ◽  
A Bhagra ◽  
R Chaudhry ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Laney K. Jones ◽  
Vanessa Duboski ◽  
Katrina M. Romagnoli ◽  
Alison Flango ◽  
Jami Marks ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document