Search

Background: Substantial numbers of hospital readmissions occur due to medication-related problems. Pharmacists can implement different interventions at hospital discharge that aim to reduce those readmissions. It is unclear which pharmacist-led interventions at hospital discharge are the most promising in reducing readmissions., Aim: This scoping review aimed to summarise pharmacist-led interventions conducted at hospital discharge that demonstrated a reduction in readmissions., Method: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases up to February 2024. We included studies that focused on pharmacist-led interventions at hospital discharge and reported significant readmission reductions. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Data extracted included study characteristics, populations and the type of implemented pharmacist-led interventions along with the reduction in readmission rates achieved., Results: We included 25 articles for data synthesis. Many of the studies included either implemented at least two interventions concurrently or were part of broader programmes involving other healthcare professionals. The most common pharmacist-led interventions associated with reduced readmission rates included medication reconciliation, counselling and post-discharge follow-up by telephone. Follow-up primarily aimed to improve patients' treatment adherence through education about their medications. Furthermore, many studies reported on multi-component interventions that began at hospital admission or during inpatient stays, not only at discharge., Conclusion: Successfully reducing readmissions through pharmacist-led interventions at hospital discharge suggests the effectiveness of a holistic approach incorporating multiple interventions. While these findings offer insights for pharmacists, further research should focus on conducting high-quality studies using a multifaceted approach to identify the most appropriate timing and combination., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to declare., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Chronic non-cancer pain may affect up to 51% of the general population. Pharmacist interventions have shown promise in enhancing patient safety and outcomes. However, our understanding of the scope of pharmacists' interventions remains incomplete., Aim: Our goal was to characterise pharmacists' interventions for the management of chronic non-cancer pain., Method: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO databases and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. Abstracts and full texts were independently screened by two reviewers. Data were extracted by one reviewer, and validated by the second. Outcomes of studies were charted using the dimensions of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT)., Results: Forty-eight reports were included. Interventions ensuring appropriate drug prescription occurred in 37 (79%) studies. Patient education and healthcare professional education were reported in 28 (60%) and 5 (11%) studies, respectively. Therapy monitoring occurred in 17 (36%) studies. Interventions regularly involved interprofessional collaboration. A median of 75% of reported outcome domains improved due to pharmacist interventions, especially patient disposition (adherence), medication safety and satisfaction with therapy., Conclusion: Pharmacists' interventions enhanced the management of chronic non-cancer pain. Underreported outcome domains and interventions, such as medication management, merit further investigation., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Medication safety is important to limit adverse events for nursing home residents. Several factors, such as interprofessional collaboration with pharmacists and medication reviews, have been shown in the literature to influence medication safety processes., Aim: This study had three main objectives: (1) To assess how facility- and unit-level organization and infrastructure are related to medication use processes; (2) To determine the extent of medication safety-relevant processes; and (3) To explore pharmacies' and pharmacists' involvement in nursing homes' medication-related processes., Method: Cross-sectional multicenter survey data (2018-2019) from a convenience sample of 118 Swiss nursing homes were used. Data were collected on facility and unit characteristics, pharmacy services, as well as medication safety-related structures and processes. Descriptive statistics were used., Results: Most of the participating nursing homes (93.2%) had electronic resident health record systems that supported medication safety in various ways (e.g., medication lists, interaction checks). Electronic data exchanges with outside partners such as pharmacies or physicians were available for fewer than half (10.2-46.3%, depending on the partner). Pharmacists collaborating with nursing homes were mainly involved in logistical support. Medication reviews were reportedly conducted regularly in two-thirds of facilities., Conclusion: A high proportion of Swiss nursing homes have implemented diverse processes and structures that support medication use and safety for residents; however, their collaboration with pharmacists remains relatively limited., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Pharmacists contribute to medication safety by providing their services in various settings. However, standardized definitions of the role of pharmacists in hospice and palliative care (HPC) are lacking., Aim: The purpose of this scoping review was to provide an overview of the evidence on the role of pharmacists and to map clinical activities in inpatient HPC., Method: We performed a scoping review according to the PRISMA-ScR extension in CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed. We used the American Society of Hospital Pharmacists (ASHP) Guidelines on the Pharmacist's Role in Palliative and Hospice Care as a framework for standardized categorization of the identified roles and clinical activities., Results: After screening 635 records (published after January 1st, 2000), the scoping review yielded 23 publications reporting various pharmacy services in HPC. The articles addressed the five main categories in the following descending order: 'Medication order review and reconciliation', 'Medication counseling, education and training', 'Administrative Roles', 'Direct patient care', and 'Education and scholarship'. A total of 172 entries were mapped to the subcategories that were added to the main categories., Conclusion: This scoping review identified a variety of pharmacists' roles and clinical activities. The gathered evidence will help to establish and define the role of pharmacists in inpatient hospice and palliative care., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Professional home care nurses are often tasked with the medication management of older, polymedicated clients. The medication use process is often complex and prone to medication errors. From the perspective of professional caregivers, the interprofessional interfaces of care as well as the integration of clients and informal caregivers are a major challenge., Aim: With this study, we explored the perspective of home care clients and their informal caregivers on the medication use process supported by professional caregivers with a focus on medication safety., Method: We chose a qualitative research approach, using guideline-based interviews with eight clients and five caregivers. Data were analyzed applying the topical analysis according to Braun and Clarke., Results and Discussion: Before engaging professional home care nurses in the medication use process, clients reached their physical, psychological and social limits. They were relieved when the professional home care organization took care of the overall coordination of the medication use process and felt safe. They trust professional caregivers and see limited need to be preoccupied with medication safety themselves, despite risks inherent in self-medication, adherence and transition of care., Conclusion: Through the relief provided by professional caregivers, home care clients and their informal caregivers no longer perceive themselves as active partners in maintaining medication safety. Healthcare professionals should keep an eye on self-medication as well as adherence and support the use of the medication plan., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background The shift from inpatient to ambulatory care has resulted in an increase in home care patients. Little is known regarding medication safety associated with patient transfer from hospital to home care. Objective To evaluate medication-related problems in patients transferring from hospital to home care in Switzerland. Setting A non-for-profit home care organization in the city of Lucerne/Switzerland. Methods We conducted a prospective observational study, including patients aged ≥ 64 years and receiving ≥ 4 medications at hospital discharge. Two structured questionnaires assessing the transfer process were completed by home care nurses. Prescription quality was assessed using a PCNE Type 2b Medication Review. Main outcome measures The quality of the transfer process was measured comparing agreed-upon with reported parameters. Prescription quality was analyzed assessing the unambiguity of the prescription. Potentially inappropriate medications (Priscus ® list), contraindications, duplications and interactions, and clinical pharmacist-identified potential medication-related problems were collected. Results Study patients (n = 100) received 8.6 ± 3.5 regularly administered medications. Only 5/100 patients had a complete set of written discharge information. At the time of the first visit, 13/100 patients had no written medication information available. Discharge medication prescriptions were clear to nurses in 62% of patients. In 20 patients, the required medications were unavailable, resulting in 19 medication errors. Assessment by a clinical pharmacist revealed only 33/100 patients had a clear discharge prescription. Of a total of 984 prescribed drugs, 16% were considered to be ambiguous, 22 (2.2%) were potentially inappropriate. 7/984 drugs were contraindicated, 8 were duplicates. Conclusion In addition to the known risk factors in patients transferring from hospital to home care (age, polymedication, multiple providers), 3 major problems impacted upon medication safety: fragmented communication, unreliable medication availability and a poor prescription quality. Clinical pharmacists are an important option to improve medication safety ass.

Introduction While drug-related problems (DRPs) in the inpatient setting are well known, the scope of these problems in home care has not been critically evaluated. Aim of the Review Our primary objective was to evaluate the incidence and demographics of DRPs in home care. Our specific aims were to characterize the rate of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), medication errors (MEs) and adverse drug events (ADEs) and to identify risk factors which contribute to DRPs in the home care setting. Methods Pubmed, Embase and CiNAHL databases were systematically searched from January 2000 to December 2016 for all publications which quantitatively characterized DRPs in the home care setting. Results The most commonly reported DRPs characterized in studies were PIMs (n = 16), MEs (n = 4) and the ME-subcategory medication-related discrepancies (n = 7). The frequency of PIMs ranged from 19.8 to 48.4%; up to 26% PIMs were considered severe. Polypharmacy (≥ 9 drugs) and increasing age were the most common risk factors for DRPs. Insufficient interdisciplinary teamwork and inconsistent performance of medication reviews were also risks factors for DRPs. Patients and/or caregivers were responsible for 42.3% of DRPs. Discussion Compared with acute inpatient care, DRPs are more frequently reported in home care. The rate of DRPs varies depending upon the reference used to define the problem. Conclusion Transfer of complete medical records and the use of an interdisciplinary team have the potential to reduce DRPs, including MEs, specifically when integrating a pharmacist providing regular medication review. Importantly, patients and informal caregivers must be significant partners with this interdisciplinary team.

Background: Foreign-language (FL) patients are at increased risk for adverse drug events. Evidence regarding communication barriers and the safety of pharmaceutical care of FL patients in European countries is scarce despite large migrant populations., Objective: To investigate Swiss public pharmacists' experiences and current practices in counselling FL patients with a focus on patient safety., Method: In a cross-sectional study heads of public pharmacies in Switzerland were surveyed using an electronic questionnaire., Main Outcome Measure: The survey assessed the frequency of communication barriers encountered in medication counselling of FL patients, perceptions of risks for adverse drug events, satisfaction with the quality of counselling provided to FL patients, current strategies to reduce risks, and preferences towards tools to improve safety for FL patients., Results: 498 pharmacists completed the survey (43 % response rate). More than every second pharmacist reported at least weekly encounters at which they cannot provide good medication counselling to FL patients in the regional Swiss language. Ad-hoc interpreting by minors is also common at a considerable number of pharmacies (26.5 % reported at least one weekly occurrence). Approximately 10 % of pharmacies reported that they fail at least weekly to explain the essentials of drug therapy (e.g. dosing of children's medications) to FL patients. 79.8 % perceived the risk of FL patients for adverse drug events to be somewhat or much higher compared to other patients. 22.5 % of pharmacists reported being concerned at least monthly about medication safety when FL patients leave their pharmacy. However, the majority of pharmacists were satisfied with the quality of care provided to FL patients in their pharmacy [78.6 % (very) satisfied]. The main strategy used to improve counselling for FL patients was the employment of multilingual staff. Participants would use software for printing foreign-language labels (41.2 %) and multilingual package inserts (42.0 %) if these were available., Conclusion: Communication barriers with FL patients are frequent in Swiss pharmacies and pharmacists perceive FL patients to be at increased risk for adverse drug events. Development and dissemination of communication tools are needed to support pharmacists in counselling of a diverse migrant population.

Background: Starting in 2007, regulatory agencies strengthened label warnings for intravenous haloperidol. Based on adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports of QT prolongation and torsades de pointes, regulatory agencies recommended the use of continuous telemetry or advising against the intravenous administration in general. Intravenous haloperidol is commonly used as a first line treatment for acute delirium. Consequently, the extended warning has caused uncertainty among health care professionals., Objective: The aim of this study is to critically evaluate the WHO global individual case safety report (ICSR) database VigiBase for QT prolongation, torsades and/or cardiac arrest involving intravenous haloperidol compared to other routes of administration and the antipsychotics olanzapine and quetiapine., Method: All WHO safety reports (1972-2010) of cardiac reactions associated with haloperidol, quetiapine and olanzapine were evaluated, including dose, route of administration and patient risk factors. Reporting odds ratios for the 3 antipsychotics were calculated. Main outcome measure Number of submitted reports on different antipsychotics., Results: The absolute number of ICSR regarding QT prolongation, torsades and/or cardiac arrest were: haloperidol (365 cases), olanzapine (489) and quetiapine (520). Reporting rates of haloperidol did not increase over the last two decades. 32% of the haloperidol cases involved oral, 16.4% intramuscular and 22.7% intravenous administration. The difference of the reporting odds ratios of haloperidol and quetiapine were not statistically significant. Olanzapine was associated with a slightly lower reporting odds ratio., Conclusion: While regulatory agencies advise against the use of intravenous haloperidol, review of VigiBase does not reveal that the intravenous route is any more likely to be associated with cardiac adverse events. Furthermore, our results do not demonstrate any additional risk associated with haloperidol when compared with alternative agents. Although pharmacovigilance data does not routinely include a denominator regarding frequency of use, regulatory agencies are currently advising against the use of intravenous haloperidol based on pharmacovigilance, but the number of overall reports is greater for quetiapine and olanzapine when compared to haloperidol. Improved pharmacovigilance approaches are needed to more accurately address the safe, effective use of medicines.