Search

Background: AT-HARM10 is a research tool to identify possible drug-related hospital admissions. It is unclear whether the tool can be applied to emergency department visits as well., Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability and reliability to identify drug-related emergency department visits in older patients with AT-HARM10., Method: A random sample of 400 patients aged 65 years or older from a clinical trial in four Swedish hospitals was selected. All patients' emergency department visits within 12 months after discharge were assessed with AT-HARM10. The main outcome measures were the percentage of successfully assessed visits for applicability and the interrater reliability (Cohen's kappa)., Results: Of the initial sample (n = 400), 113 patients [median age (interquartile range): 81 (76-88) years] had at least one emergency department visit within 12 months. The patients had in total 184 visits, of which 179 (97%) were successfully assessed. Fifty-three visits (29%) were possibly drug-related. The Cohen's kappa value was 0.70 (substantial)., Conclusion: It seems applicable and reliable to identify possible drug-related emergency department visits in addition to hospital admissions in older patients with AT-HARM10. As a consequence, the tool has been updated to support its novel use in clinical research., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: There is a lack of knowledge about factors that influence the performance of comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) by multiprofessional teams in hospital practice. This study aimed to explore the facilitators and barriers for performing CMRs and post-discharge follow-up in older hospitalised patients from the healthcare professional perspective., Methods: Physicians and ward-based pharmacists were recruited from an ongoing trial at four hospitals in Sweden. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 physicians and 7 pharmacists. Interview topics were working processes, resources, competences, medication-related problems, intervention effects and collaboration. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Identified subthemes were categorised as facilitators or barriers and grouped into overarching main themes., Results: In total, 21 facilitators and 25 barriers were identified across all CFIR domains and grouped in 6 main themes: (a) CMRs and follow-up are needed, but not in all patients; (b) there is a general belief in positive effects; (c) lack of resources is an issue, although the performance of CMRs may save time; (d) pharmacists' knowledge and skills are valuable, but they need more clinical competence; (e) compatibility with hospital practice is challenging, and roles and responsibilities are unclear and (f) personal contact at the ward is essential for physician-pharmacist collaboration., Conclusion: Multiple facilitators and barriers for performing CMRs and post-discharge follow-up in older hospitalised patients exist. These factors should be addressed in future initiatives with similar interventions by multiprofessional teams to ensure successful implementation and performance in hospital practice.

Background Medication-related hospital admissions (MRAs) are frequently used to measure outcomes in studies involving medication reviews. The process of identifying MRAs is subjective and time-consuming, and practical, validated alternatives are required. Objective The aim of this study was to develop and validate a practical tool to identify MRAs. Setting Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden. Method We reviewed existing literature on methods to identify MRAs. The tool AT-HARM10 was developed using an iterative process including content validity and feasibility testing. The tool's inter-rater reliability (IRR) and criterion-related validity (CRV) were assessed: four pairs of either final-year undergraduate or postgraduate pharmacy students applied the tool to one of two batches of 50 older patients' hospital admissions. Assessment of the same 100 admissions by two experienced clinicians acted as gold standard. Main outcome measure Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa for IRR, and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value for CRV. Results AT-HARM10 consists of ten closed questions to distinguish between admissions that are unlikely to be and those that are possibly medication-related. The IRR was moderate to substantial (Cohen's kappa values were 0.45-0.75 and Fleiss' kappa values were 0.46 and 0.58). The sensitivity and specificity values were 70/86% and 74/70%, positive and negative predictive values were 73/74% and 71/83% respectively. Both AT-HARM10 and the gold standard identified approximately 50% of the admissions as MRAs. Conclusion AT-HARM10 has been developed as a practical tool to identify MRAs and the tool is valid for use in older patients by final-year undergraduate and postgraduate pharmacy students.

Background: Clinical pharmacy in a hospital setting is relatively new in Sweden. Its recent introduction at the University Hospital in Uppsala has provided an opportunity for evaluation by other relevant professionals of the integration of clinical pharmacists into the health-care team., Objectives: The objectives of this descriptive study were to evaluate the perceived value of wardbased clinical pharmacists from the perspective of hospital based physicians and nurses and to identify potential advantages and disadvantages related to the new inter professional collaboration. Another objective was to evaluate the experiences of general practitioners on receiving medication reports from ward-based clinical pharmacists., Setting: Two acute internal medicine wards at the University Hospital in Uppsala, where a previously reported randomized controlled trial investigating the effects of ward based clinical pharmacists on re-visits to hospital was undertaken., Methods: Data were collected by questionnaires containing closed- and open-ended questions. The questionnaires were distributed during the nine-month study period of the randomized controlled trial by an independent researcher to 29 hospital-based physicians and 44 nurses on the study wards and to 21 general practitioners who had received two or more medication reports. Answers were analysed descriptively for the closed-ended questions and by content analysis for the open-ended questions., Main Outcome Measure: The main outcome measure was the physicians' and nurses' level of satisfaction with the new collaboration with clinical pharmacists, from a hospital and primary care perspective., Results: Seventy-six percent of the hospital-based physicians and 81% of the nurses completed the questionnaire. Ninety-five percent of the physicians and 93% of the nurses were very satisfied with the collaboration. Out of the 17 general practitioners (81%) that completed the questionnaire 71% wanted to continue to receive medication reports in a similar way in the future. Increased patient safety and improvements in patients' drug therapy were the main advantages stated by all three groups of respondents. Eighteen percent of the hospital-based physicians and 21% of the nurses thought that the collaboration had been time-consuming to certain or to a high extent., Conclusions: The majority of the respondents, both GPs and hospital based physicians and nurses, were satisfied with the new collaboration with the ward based pharmacists and perceived that the quality of the patients' drug therapy and drug-related patient safety had increased.