Stephanie Labonville

Classifying and Predicting Errors of Inpatient Medication Reconciliation

BackgroundFailure to reconcile medications across transitions in care is an important source of potential harm to patients. Little is known about the predictors of unintentional medication discrepancies and how, when, and where they occur.ObjectiveTo determine the reasons, timing, and predictors of potentially harmful medication discrepancies.DesignProspective observational study.PatientsAdmitted general medical patients.MeasurementsStudy pharmacists took gold-standard medication histories and compared them with medical teams’ medication histories, admission and discharge orders. Blinded teams of physicians adjudicated all unexplained discrepancies using a modification of an existing typology. The main outcome was the number of potentially harmful unintentional medication discrepancies per patient (potential adverse drug events or PADEs).ResultsAmong 180 patients, 2066 medication discrepancies were identified, and 257 (12%) were unintentional and had potential for harm (1.4 per patient). Of these, 186 (72%) were due to errors taking the preadmission medication history, while 68 (26%) were due to errors reconciling the medication history with discharge orders. Most PADEs occurred at discharge (75%). In multivariable analyses, low patient understanding of preadmission medications, number of medication changes from preadmission to discharge, and medication history taken by an intern were associated with PADEs.ConclusionsUnintentional medication discrepancies are common and more often due to errors taking an accurate medication history than errors reconciling this history with patient orders. Focusing on accurate medication histories, on potential medication errors at discharge, and on identifying high-risk patients for more intensive interventions may improve medication safety during and after hospitalization.

Effect of an Electronic Medication Reconciliation Application and Process Redesign on Potential Adverse Drug Events A Cluster-Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND Medication reconciliation at transitions in care is a national patient safety goal, but its effects on important patient outcomes require further evaluation. We sought to measure the impact of an information technology-based medication reconciliation intervention on medication discrepancies with potential for harm (potential adverse drug events [PADEs]). METHODS We performed a controlled trial, randomized by medical team, on general medical inpatient units at 2 academic hospitals from May to June 2006. We enrolled 322 patients admitted to 14 medical teams, for whom a medication history could be obtained before discharge. The intervention was a computerized medication reconciliation tool and process redesign involving physicians, nurses, and pharmacists. The main outcome was unintentional discrepancies between preadmission medications and admission or discharge medications that had potential for harm (PADEs). RESULTS Among 160 control patients, there were 230 PADEs (1.44 per patient), while among 162 intervention patients there were 170 PADEs (1.05 per patient) (adjusted relative risk [ARR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.99). A significant benefit was found at hospital 1 (ARR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.97) but not at hospital 2 (ARR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.57-1.32) (P = .32 for test of effect modification). Hospitals differed in the extent of integration of the medication reconciliation tool into computerized provider order entry applications at discharge. CONCLUSIONS A computerized medication reconciliation tool and process redesign were associated with a decrease in unintentional medication discrepancies with potential for patient harm. Software integration issues are likely important for successful implementation of computerized medication reconciliation tools.

Rationale and Design of the Pharmacist Intervention for Low Literacy in Cardiovascular Disease (PILL-CVD) Study

Background—Medication errors and adverse drug events are common after hospital discharge due to changes in medication regimens, suboptimal discharge instructions, and prolonged time to follow-up. Pharmacist-based interventions may be effective in promoting the safe and effective use of medications, especially among high-risk patients such as those with low health literacy. Methods and Results—The Pharmacist Intervention for Low Literacy in Cardiovascular Disease (PILL-CVD) study is a randomized controlled trial conducted at 2 academic centers—Vanderbilt University Hospital and Brigham and Womens Hospital. Patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome or acute decompensated heart failure were randomly assigned to usual care or intervention. The intervention consisted of pharmacist-assisted medication reconciliation, inpatient pharmacist counseling, low-literacy adherence aids, and tailored telephone follow-up after discharge. The primary outcome is the occurrence of serious medication errors in the first 30 days after hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes are health care utilization, disease-specific quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Enrollment was completed September 2009. A total of 862 patients were enrolled, and 430 patients were randomly assigned to receive the intervention. Analyses will determine whether the intervention was effective in reducing serious medication errors, particularly in patients with low health literacy. Conclusions—The PILL-CVD study was designed to reduce serious medication errors after hospitalization through a pharmacist-based intervention. The intervention, if effective, will inform health care facilities on the use of pharmacist-assisted medication reconciliation, inpatient counseling, low-literacy adherence aids, and patient follow-up after discharge. Clinical Trial Registration—clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT00632021.

Effect of Patient- and Medication-Related Factors on Inpatient Medication Reconciliation Errors

ABSTRACTBackgroundLittle research has examined the incidence, clinical relevance, and predictors of medication reconciliation errors at hospital admission and discharge.ObjectiveTo identify patient- and medication-related factors that contribute to pre-admission medication list (PAML) errors and admission order errors, and to test whether such errors persist in the discharge medication list.Design, ParticipantsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 423 adults with acute coronary syndromes or acute decompensated heart failure admitted to two academic hospitals who received pharmacist-assisted medication reconciliation during the Pharmacist Intervention for Low Literacy in Cardiovascular Disease (PILL–CVD) Study.Main MeasuresPharmacists assessed the number of total and clinically relevant errors in the PAML and admission and discharge medication orders. We used negative binomial regression and report incidence rate ratios (IRR) of predictors of reconciliation errors.Key ResultsOn admission, 174 of 413 patients (42%) had ≥1 PAML error, and 73 (18%) had ≥1 clinically relevant PAML error. At discharge, 158 of 405 patients (39%) had ≥1 discharge medication error, and 126 (31%) had ≥1 clinically relevant discharge medication error. Clinically relevant PAML errors were associated with older age (IRR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.00– 2.12) and number of pre-admission medications (IRR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10–1.25), and were less likely when a recent medication list was present in the electronic medical record (EMR) (IRR = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30–0.96). Clinically relevant admission order errors were also associated with older age and number of pre-admission medications. Clinically relevant discharge medication errors were more likely for every PAML error (IRR = 1.31; 95% CI, 1.19–1.45) and number of medications changed prior to discharge (IRR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01–1.11).ConclusionsMedication reconciliation errors are common at hospital admission and discharge. Errors in preadmission medication histories are associated with older age and number of medications and lead to more discharge reconciliation errors. A recent medication list in the EMR is protective against medication reconciliation errors.

Rationale and design of the Multicenter Medication Reconciliation Quality Improvement Study (MARQUIS)

BackgroundUnresolved medication discrepancies during hospitalization can contribute to adverse drug events, resulting in patient harm. Discrepancies can be reduced by performing medication reconciliation; however, effective implementation of medication reconciliation has proven to be challenging. The goals of the Multi-Center Medication Reconciliation Quality Improvement Study (MARQUIS) are to operationalize best practices for inpatient medication reconciliation, test their effect on potentially harmful unintentional medication discrepancies, and understand barriers and facilitators of successful implementation.MethodsSix U.S. hospitals are participating in this quality improvement mentored implementation study. Each hospital has collected baseline data on the primary outcome: the number of potentially harmful unintentional medication discrepancies per patient, as determined by a trained on-site pharmacist taking a “gold standard” medication history. With the guidance of their mentors, each site has also begun to implement one or more of 11 best practices to improve medication reconciliation. To understand the effect of the implemented interventions on hospital staff and culture, we are performing mixed methods program evaluation including surveys, interviews, and focus groups of front line staff and hospital leaders.DiscussionAt baseline the number of unintentional medication discrepancies in admission and discharge orders per patient varies by site from 2.35 to 4.67 (mean=3.35). Most discrepancies are due to history errors (mean 2.12 per patient) as opposed to reconciliation errors (mean 1.23 per patient). Potentially harmful medication discrepancies averages 0.45 per patient and varies by site from 0.13 to 0.82 per patient. We discuss several barriers to implementation encountered thus far. In the end, we anticipate that MARQUIS tools and lessons learned have the potential to decrease medication discrepancies and improve patient outcomes.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01337063

Evaluation of a Pharmacist-Directed Vancomycin Dosing and Monitoring Pilot Program at a Tertiary Academic Medical Center

Background: Consensus guidelines recommend vancomycin doses of 15 to 20 mg/kg every 8 to 12 hours in patients with normal renal function. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a pharmacist-directed vancomycin dosing and monitoring pilot program on the percentage of patients receiving targeted weight-based dosing recommendations. Methods: This was a pre-/postevaluation study, approved by the institutional review board at our institution, comparing retrospectively reviewed vancomycin dosing practices hospital-wide between September 1 and September 30, 2010 to patients prospectively managed by a pharmacist-directed vancomycin pilot program between February 1 and April 26, 2011. All adult inpatients receiving intravenous vancomycin were included, unless patients had a creatinine clearance less than or equal to 60 mL/min or indication for therapy was surgical prophylaxis or febrile neutropenia. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients who received optimal vancomycin dosing defined as ≥30 mg/kg/d within 24 hours of initiation of therapy. Secondary outcomes included number of pharmacist interventions, length of therapy and incidence of nephrotoxicity while receiving vancomycin. Results: A total of 319 patients were analyzed, 161 preimplementation and 158 postimplementation. The percentage of patients who received optimal vancomycin dosing was significantly higher postimplementation of the pilot program, 96.8 versus 40.4% (P < 0.001). Pharmacist-directed interventions postimplementation, resulted in 50% more patients being dosed optimally (P < 0.001). Patients in the pilot program also had a shorter length of therapy (10.0 vs 8.4 days, P < 0.003) and a lower incidence of nephrotoxicity (8.7% vs 3.2%, P = 0.006). Conclusions: This pharmacist-directed vancomycin pilot program significantly increased the percentage of patients optimally dosed according to consensus guidelines within 24 hours of initiation of therapy.

Effects of a multifaceted medication reconciliation quality improvement intervention on patient safety: final results of the MARQUIS study

Background Unintentional discrepancies across care settings are a common form of medication error and can contribute to patient harm. Medication reconciliation can reduce discrepancies; however, effective implementation in real-world settings is challenging. Methods We conducted a pragmatic quality improvement (QI) study at five US hospitals, two of which included concurrent controls. The intervention consisted of local implementation of medication reconciliation best practices, utilising an evidence-based toolkit with 11 intervention components. Trained QI mentors conducted monthly site phone calls and two site visits during the intervention, which lasted from December 2011 through June 2014. The primary outcome was number of potentially harmful unintentional medication discrepancies per patient; secondary outcome was total discrepancies regardless of potential for harm. Time series analysis used multivariable Poisson regression. Results Across five sites, 1648 patients were sampled: 613 during baseline and 1035 during the implementation period. Overall, potentially harmful discrepancies did not decrease over time beyond baseline temporal trends, adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.97 per month (95% CI 0.86 to 1.08), p=0.53. The intervention was associated with a reduction in total medication discrepancies, IRR 0.92 per month (95% CI 0.87 to 0.97), p=0.002. Of the four sites that implemented interventions, three had reductions in potentially harmful discrepancies. The fourth site, which implemented interventions and installed a new electronic health record (EHR), saw an increase in discrepancies, as did the fifth site, which did not implement any interventions but also installed a new EHR. Conclusions Mentored implementation of a multifaceted medication reconciliation QI initiative was associated with a reduction in total, but not potentially harmful, medication discrepancies. The effect of EHR implementation on medication discrepancies warrants further study. Trial registration number NCT01337063.

Erratum to: Effect of Patient- and Medication-Related Factors on Inpatient Medication Reconciliation Errors

Erratum to: J Gen Intern Med DOI: 10.1007/s11606-012-2003-y On page 6 of the original publication, in the first full paragraph, “an additional 73 patients” should read simply “73 patients,” “another 38 patients” should read simply “38 patients,” and “an additional 126 patients” should read simply “126 patients.”