Search

Patients with chronic disease usually need to take multiple medications. Drug-related interactions, adverse events, suboptimal adherence, and self-medication are components that can affect medication safety and lead to serious consequences for the patient. At present, regular medication reviews to check what medicines have been prescribed and what medicines are actually taken by the patient or the structured evaluation of drug-related problems rarely take place in Germany. The process of "medication reconciliation" or "medication review" as developed in the USA and the UK aim at increasing medication safety and therefore represent an instrument of quality assurance. Within the HeiCare(®) project a structured medication management was developed for general practice, with medical assistants playing a major role in the implementation of the process. Both the structured medication management and the tools developed for the medication check and medication counselling will be outlined in this article; also, findings on feasibility and acceptance in various projects and experiences from a total of 200 general practices (56 HeiCare(®), 29 HiCMan,115 PraCMan) will be described. The results were obtained from questionnaires and focus group discussions. The implementation of a structured medication management intervention into daily routine was seen as a challenge. Due to the high relevance of medication reconciliation for daily clinical practice, however, the checklists - once implemented successfully - have been applied even after the end of the project. They have led to the regular review and reconciliation of the physicians' documentation of the medicines prescribed (medication chart) with the medicines actually taken by the patient., (Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

Background: Primary care for chronic illness varies across European healthcare systems. In patients suffering from coronary heart disease (CHD), factors associated with patients' experiences of receiving structured chronic care and counselling at the patient and practice level were investigated., Methods: In an observational study comprising 140 general practices from five European countries (Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom), 30 patients with Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) per practice were chosen at random to partake in this research. Patients were provided with a questionnaire and the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC-5A) - instrument. Practice characteristics were assessed through a practice questionnaire and face to face interviews. Data were aggregated to obtain two practice scores representing quality management and CHD care, respectively. A hierarchical multilevel analysis was performed to examine the impact of patient and practice characteristics on PACIC scores., Results: The final sample included 1745 CHD-patients from 131 general practices with a mean age of 67.8 (SD 9.9) years. The overall PACIC score was 2.84 (95%CI: 2.79; 2.89) and the 5A score reflecting structured lifestyle counselling was 2.75 (95% CI: 2.69; 2.79). At the patient level, male gender, more frequent practice contact and fewer related or unrelated conditions were associated with higher PACIC scores. At the practice level, performance scores reflecting quality management (p = 0.013) and CHD care (p = 0.009) were associated with improved assessment of the structured chronic care and counselling received., Conclusions: Patients' perceived quality of care varies. However, good practice management and organisation of care were positively reflected in patients' assessments of receiving structured chronic illness care. This highlights the importance of integrating patient experiences into quality measurements to provide feedback to health care professionals.

Background and Objective: Changes between health care sectors represent a critical phase in long-term pharmacotherapy. The aim of the Hei CARE(®) project was to close the communication gap at the interface between primary care physicians (PCP), hospital physicians and patients, and to improve quality and safety of pharmacotherapy., Methods: Physicians who enrolled patients with long-term pharmacotherapy were able to participate in the Hei CARE(®) project. After enrolment the patient's medication was entered in the internet-based medication knowledge data base AiD PRAXIS and checked for medication interactions and optimized if necessary. At hospitalisation medication was transferred electronically to the hospital (AiD KLINIK(®)) and on discharge integrated in the discharge letter and faxed to the primary care physician (PCP). The project was evaluated using quantitative and qualitative methods. Hei CARE(®) -cases, in which medication was transferred electronically as planned, were compared with the other cases. PCPs' experiences were collected in focus groups., Results: One thousand and three chronically ill patients of 56 primary care practices participated. 259 patients were hospitalized between October 2005 and March 2009 of which entrance and discharge medication were transferred both ways via the electronic prescribing platform in 67 cases. The number of changes in medication was reduced in comparison to the other cases. Participating PCPs reported positive changes through Hei CARE(®) as well as further potential for optimizing communication across health care sectors., Conclusion: Use of a common internet-based medication knowledge data base (Hei CARE(®) ) in both health care sectors reduced the number of changes in pharmacotherapy. Seamless care in chronically ill patients was thereby improved. The project also demonstrated that improving communication across health care sectors is a slow process., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Background: The number of patients with chronic diseases is increasing which poses a challenge to healthcare organisations. A proactive, structured, and population-orientated approach is needed: the chronic care model (CCM) provides such a framework., Aim: To assess organisational conditions for providing structured chronic care according to the CCM across different healthcare systems., Design of Study: International observational study., Setting: A stratified sample of 315 primary care practices in 10 European countries and Israel in 2008 and 2009., Method: Practice questionnaires and interviews. Outcome measures were mean practice scores on CCM domains per country, as a percentage of the maximum score, and the influence of practice size and urbanisation on these scores., Results: Practice size showed large differences with the largest practices in Spain, England, Finland, and Israel. These countries, with a strong primary care orientation, had most physicians and staff involved per practice. The CCM domains 'clinical information systems' and 'decision support' had total practice means of 90%; other domains scored about 50%. Spain and England scored above average on almost all domains. Practice size and urbanisation had little impact., Conclusion: Characteristics for chronic care delivery differed for most CCM domains. The most common characteristics related to computerisation, providing a good starting point and high potential everywhere. All countries showed room for improvement. Further research should focus on relations between practice characteristics, organisational features, including health system and primary care orientation, and outcomes. Primary care seems suited for chronic care delivery; however, a stronger primary care was associated with better scores.