Search

Christiane Eickhoff,1 Uta Müller,1 Sophie Thomas,2 Christian Schmidt,2 Lisa Sophie Hartling,3 Sebastian Michael,3,4 Martin Schulz,1,5 Thilo Bertsche2,6 1Department of Medicine, ABDA – Federal Union of German Associations of Pharmacists, Berlin, Germany; 2Clinical Pharmacy Department, Institute of Pharmacy, Medical Faculty, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany; 3Löwen-Apotheke Waldheim e.K, Waldheim, Germany; 4Saxon Pharmacists Association, Leipzig, Germany; 5Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany; 6Drug Safety Center, Medical Faculty, Leipzig University and Leipzig University Hospital, Leipzig, GermanyCorrespondence: Christiane Eickhoff, Department of Medicine, ABDA – Federal Union of German Associations of Pharmacists, Heidestrasse 7, Berlin, 10557, Germany, Tel +49 30 40004-529, Fax +49 30 40004-513, Email C.Eickhoff@abda.dePurpose: A medication list (ML) is a document listing the patient’s entire medication, instructions for use, and indications. In Germany, a national standard was established in 2016 by law. However, data on patients’ use of this standardized ML are scarce. We investigated (i) patients’ practical use of the ML, (ii) patients’ understanding of the ML, (iii) completeness and correctness of the current ML version, and (iv) reasons why patients did not adhere to their ML.Patients and Methods: Community pharmacists recruited patients possessing a standardized ML with ≥ 5 medications. Information sources to evaluate the ML were: (a) brown bag analysis, (b) practical demonstration, (c) patient interview, and (d) patient file. Data were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative methods.Results: Two hundred and eighty-eight patients (median age: 76 years, range: 27– 95) were enrolled. (i) 38.5% of the patients used their ML regularly to prepare their medication and 73.3% to inform their physician. (ii) Overall, patients’ understanding of the ML was good, with > 80% of the patients being able to identify all relevant information. (iii) While n = 2779 medications were actually taken, n = 2539 were documented on the ML. No ML was fully correct and complete. Regarding particularly relevant items, ie, active ingredient, strength, dosage, medication missing or listed but not taken, 79.2% of ML were incorrect or incomplete. Handwritten modifications on the ML were frequent. (iv) Almost 60% of all patients did not follow their ML with “fear of adverse drug reactions” being the most frequently (n = 50) mentioned reason.Conclusion: Completeness and correctness of the current ML version was poor with handwritten modifications being frequent. Additionally, most of the patients did not adhere to their ML. This indicates that measures that lead to correct and up-to-date ML and improvements in patient counseling about their medication should be developed and implemented into routine practice.Keywords: medication list, medication schedule, medication plan, community pharmacy, medication safety, polypharmacy

A complete medication plan (MPlan) increases medication safety and adherence and is crucial in care transitions. Countries that implemented a standardized MPlan reported benefits on patients’ understanding and handling of their medication. Austria lacks such a standardization, with no available data on the issue. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the current state of all medication documentations (MDocs) at hospital admission in a population at high risk for polypharmacy in Austria. Methods: We enrolled 512 consecutive patients undergoing elective coronary angiography. Their MDocs and medications were recorded at admission. MDocs were categorized, whereby a MPlan was defined as a tabular list including medication name, dose, route, frequency and patient name. Results: Out of 485 patients, 55.1% had an MDoc (median number of drugs: 6, range 2–17), of whom 24.7% had unstructured documentation, 18.0% physicians’ letters and 54.3% MPlans. Polypharmacy patients did not have a MDoc in 31.3%. Crucial information as the patients’s name or the originator of the MDoc was missing in 31.1% and 20.4%, respectively. Patients with MDoc provided more comprehensive medication information (p = 0.019), although over-the-counter-medication was missing in 94.5% of MDocs. A discrepancy between the MPlan and current medication at admission existed in 64.4%. In total, only 10.7% of our patient cohort presented an MPlan that was in accordance with their current medication. Conclusion: The situation in Austria is far from a standardized MPlan generated in daily routine. Numerous MPlans do not represent the current medication and could pose a potential risk for the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapy.

Aims: Patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) require polypharmacy and are at increased risk for drug-related problems. Interdisciplinary physician-pharmacist medication review may improve drug treatment. Our goal was to analyze the changes from the physician-documented medication plan (MP) and patient-stated medication to an interdisciplinary consolidated MP (CMP).Methods: This pre-specified subanalysis of the PHARM-CHF randomized controlled trial analyzed the medication review of CHF patients in the pharmacy care group. Community pharmacists compared the MP with the drug regimen stated by the patient and consulted with physicians on identified discrepancies and other medication-related problems resulting in a CMP.Results: We analyzed 93 patients (mean 74.0 ± 6.6 years, 37.6% female), taking a median of ten (IQR 8–13) drugs. 80.6% of patients had at least one change from MP to CMP. We identified changes in 32.7% (303/926) of drugs. The most common correction was the addition of a drug not documented in the MP to the CMP (43.2%). We also determined frequent modifications in the dosing regimens (37.6%). The omission of a drug documented in the MP but left out of the CMP accounted for 19.1%. Comparing patient-stated medication to CMP, the current drug regimen of patients was changed in 22.4% of drugs.Conclusion: The medication review resulted in changes of medication between MP and CMP in most of the patients and affected one-third of drugs. Structured physician-pharmacist interdisciplinary care is able to harmonize and optimize the drug treatment of CHF patients.

Lea Botermann,1,2 Katrin Krueger,1 Christiane Eickhoff,1 Charlotte Kloft,2 Martin Schulz1–31Department of Medicine, ABDA – Federal Union of German Associations of Pharmacists, Berlin, 2Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Berlin, 3Department of Pharmacology, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, GermanyPurpose: The Action Plan for Medication Safety by the German Federal Ministry of Health introduced a standardized medication plan (MP), a printable document for the patient. The practical handling needs to be tested before the nationwide implementation in Germany. Therefore, the aims of our study were 1) to develop an instrument to evaluate the usage of the standardized MP, 2) to assess if patients can locate, and 3) understand important information. Moreover, we explored patients’ opinion and suggestions regarding the standardized MP template.Patients and methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study to evaluate the practical handling of the standardized MP. We interviewed 40 adult patients in seven community pharmacies in Germany, who took at least five medicines regularly and gave their written informed consent. The interview consisted of questions regarding finding and understanding information provided on a mock-up MP, patients’ opinion and the execution of the information on the MP by filling pill boxes. We eventually developed a new evaluation method to quantify the practical handling of the MP by rating the pill boxes filled by the patients.Results: Overall, the participants rated the MP positively. Thirty-nine (98%) participants found important information on a mock-up standardized MP. Patients were questioned to identify if they understood information on medical intake as it relates to meals. In particular, they were questioned about medicine intake “1 hour before a meal”, which 98% (n=39) interpreted correctly, and “during a meal”, which 100% (n=40) interpreted correctly. The less precise advice of “before a meal” was interpreted correctly by 73% (n=29), and only 15% (n=6) correctly interpreted the term “after the meal”. The evaluation of the filled pill boxes resulted in the “Evaluation Tool to test the handling of the Medication Plan” (ET-MP) – a weighted scoring system.Conclusion: The standardized MP is clearly arranged, and patients are able to find important information. The findings of this study resulted in minor but important revisions of the standardized MP template. The developed evaluation tool ET-MP may serve as an objective instrument to assess patients’ ability to transfer written information on the MP into practical handling of medicines.Keywords: medication plan, medication schedule, ET-MP, Action Plan for Medication Safety, Germany, patient safety, pharmacotherapy

According to the German E-Health-Law it will be mandatory to hand out a national medication plan (BMP) in printed form to all patients that have a prescription of three or more drugs to take at the same time starting 1 April, 2017. Part of this printout is a datamatrix code that encodes all medication information using the XML-based UKF (German: Ultrakurzformat) in order to include a means for a standardized electronic transfer of the data. Generated by the general practitioner, the medication plan also needs to be updated through medical specialists, clinical doctors or pharmacists. This paper documents, based on usage scenarios for the BMP, the long way from theory to practical use and points to organizational and technical hurdles that need to be overcome as part of the digitalization. Along with the implications for the process dimension, a technical infrastructure is introduced and different challenges in working with the UKF are identified and discussed

With the formulation of a claim for a national uniform medication plan, the German government has taken an important step towards optimizing the documentation of medication for multimorbid patients. The aim of the research project “Medication Plan PLUS” is, amongst others, to identify previously unknown optimization potentials in the national medication plan and implement it into a more improved specification. The following work deals with the conceptualization of a questionnaire for the evaluation of optimization potentials within the national uniform medication plan. The focus lies on improving the health-related quality of life of the individual patients. In addition to the setting and the number of subjects, further research questions serve as the basis for the survey instrument defined for this purpose. The primary focus lies on questions that are aiming to determine the subjective perception of readability as well as the general acceptance and practicability of the medication plan. Although the national uniform medication plan has already been evaluated in various studies and project proposals, they show significant limitations which can be excluded in the project proposal for Medication Plan PLUS.