Search

Aims: Medication harm has negative clinical and economic consequences, contributing to hospitalisation, morbidity and mortality. The incidence ranges from 4 to 14%, of which up to 50% of events may be preventable. A predictive model for identifying high-risk inpatients can guide a timely and systematic approach to prioritisation. The aim of this study is to develop and internally validate a risk prediction model for prioritisation of hospitalised patients at risk of medication harm., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in general medical and geriatric specialties at an Australian hospital over six months. Medication harm was identified using International Classification of Disease (ICD-10) codes and the hospital's incident database. Sixty-eight variables, including medications and laboratory results, were extracted from the hospital's databases. Multivariable logistic regression was used to develop the final risk model. Performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operative characteristic curve (AuROC) and clinical utility was determined using decision curve analysis., Results: The study cohort included 1982 patients with median age 74 years, of which 136 (7%) experienced at least one adverse medication event(s). The model included: length of stay, hospital re-admission within 12 months, venous or arterial thrombosis and/or embolism, ≥ 8 medications, serum sodium < 126 mmol/L, INR > 3, anti-psychotic, antiarrhythmic and immunosuppressant medications, and history of medication allergy. Validation gave an AuROC of 0.70 (95% CI: 0.65-0.74). Decision curve analysis identified that the AIME may be clinically useful to help guide decision making in practice., Conclusion: We have developed a predictive model with reasonable performance. Future steps include external validation and impact evaluation., (© 2020 British Pharmacological Society.)

Aim: An emerging approach to reducing hospital adverse drug events is the use of predictive risk scores. The aim of this systematic review was to critically appraise models developed for predicting adverse drug event risk in inpatients., Methods: Embase, PubMed, CINAHL and Scopus databases were used to identify studies of predictive risk models for hospitalized adult inpatients. Studies had to have used multivariable logistic regression for model development, resulting in a score or rule with two or more variables, to predict the likelihood of inpatient adverse drug events. The Checklist for the critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) was used to critically appraise eligible studies., Results: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Ten described the development of a new model, whilst one study revalidated and updated an existing score. Studies used different definitions for outcome but were synonymous with or closely related to adverse drug events. Four studies undertook external validation, five internally validated and two studies did not validate their model. No studies evaluated impact of risk scores on patient outcomes., Conclusion: Adverse drug event risk prediction is a complex endeavour but could help to improve patient safety and hospital resource management. Studies in this review had some limitations in their methods for model development, reporting and validation. Two studies, the BADRI and Trivalle's risk scores, used better model development and validation methods and reported reasonable performance, and so could be considered for further research., (© 2018 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Aims: Medication non-adherence is a significant health problem. There are numerous methods for measuring adherence, but no single method performs well on all criteria. The purpose of this systematic review is to (i) identify self-report medication adherence scales that have been correlated with comparison measures of medication-taking behaviour, (ii) assess how these scales measure adherence and (iii) explore how these adherence scales have been validated., Methods: Cinahl and PubMed databases were used to search articles written in English on the development or validation of medication adherence scales dating to August 2012. The search terms used were medication adherence, medication non-adherence, medication compliance and names of each scale. Data such as barriers identified and validation comparison measures were extracted and compared., Results: Sixty articles were included in the review, which consisted of 43 adherence scales. Adherence scales include items that either elicit information regarding the patient's medication-taking behaviour and/or attempts to identify barriers to good medication-taking behaviour or beliefs associated with adherence. The validation strategies employed depended on whether the focus of the scale was to measure medication-taking behaviour or identify barriers or beliefs., Conclusions: Supporting patients to be adherent requires information on their medication-taking behaviour, barriers to adherence and beliefs about medicines. Adherence scales have the potential to explore these aspects of adherence, but currently there has been a greater focus on measuring medication-taking behaviour. Selecting the 'right' adherence scale(s) requires consideration of what needs to be measured and how (and in whom) the scale has been validated., (© 2013 The British Pharmacological Society.)