Search

Background: The collection of a complete, verified medication history is essential to patient safety. The involvement of clinical pharmacists has been shown to improve the completeness and accuracy of medication histories; however, to our knowledge, involvement of pharmacy technicians has not been studied., Objective: Our aim was to determine whether verification of medication histories by pharmacy technicians in the emergency department (ED) would result in fewer errors in inpatient medication regimens compared to verification by the admitting physician team., Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study of adult ED patients admitted for continuing care. In the intervention group, medication reconciliation was performed by pharmacy technicians in the ED before the creation of physician admitting orders. In the control group, pharmacy technicians conducted their history taking later, after admission. Initial admitting orders were then compared to the pharmacy technicians' medication reconciliation taken before admission (intervention group) or after admission (control group). Medication discrepancies were classified and determined to be justified or unjustified. Unjustified discrepancies were rated for harm potential., Results: In our cohort of 113 intervention and 75 control subjects, the mean age was 55 years (standard deviation [SD] 16 years); 96 patients (51%) were male. In the intervention group, 566 changes to home medications were observed on admission; 352 (62%) were unjustified. Among controls, 406 changes to home medications were observed; 228 (56%) were unjustified. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.0586). The rate of unjustified medication changes per patient was likewise not significantly different (3.14 [SD 2.98] in interventions vs. 3.17 [SD 2.81] in controls; p = 0.9570). The rate of medical errors did not differ between study groups, nor did severity ratings of unjustified changes., Conclusions: Medication reconciliation by pharmacy technicians in the ED did not lead to a significant reduction in unjustified medication discrepancies., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Abstract Objective. Planning for time-sensitive injury may allow emergency medical services (EMS) systems to more accurately triage patients meeting accepted criteria to facilities most capable of providing life-saving treatment. In 2010, North Carolina (NC) implemented statewide Trauma Triage and Destination Plans (TTDPs) in all 100 of North Carolina's county-defined EMS systems. Each system was responsible for identifying the specific destination hospitals with appropriate resources to treat trauma patients. We sought to characterize the accuracy of their hospital designations. Methods. In this cross-sectional study, we collected TTDPs for each county-defined EMS system, including their assigned hospital capabilities (i.e., trauma center or community hospital). We conducted a survey with each EMS system to determine how their TTDP was constructed and maintained, as well as with each TTDP-designated hospital to verify their capabilities. We determined the accuracy of the EMS assigned hospital designations by comparing them to the hospital's reported capabilities. Results. The 100 NC EMS systems provided 380 designations for 112 hospitals. TTDPs were created by EMS administrators and medical directors, with only 55% of EMS systems engaging a hospital representative in the plan creation. Compared to the actual hospital capabilities, 97% of the EMS TTDP designations were correct. Twelve hospital designations were incorrect and the majority (10) overestimated hospital capabilities. Of the 100 EMS systems, 7 misclassified hospitals in their TTDP. EMS systems that did not verify their local hospitals' capabilities during TTDP development were more likely to incorrectly categorize a hospital's capabilities (p = 0.001). Conclusions. A small number of EMS systems misclassified hospitals in their TTDP, but most plans accurately reflected hospital capabilities. Misclassification occurred more often in systems that did not consult local hospitals prior to developing their TTDP. The potential of the TTDP to improve communication between EMS agencies and the facilities with which they work has not been fully realized. EMS agencies or systems should verify local hospital capabilities when engaging in destination planning efforts.

Background: The frequency of soda consumption remains high in the United States. Soda consumption has been associated with poor bone health in children, but few studies have examined this relation in adults, and to our knowledge, no study has examined the relation of soda consumption with risk of hip fractures., Objective: We examined the association of soda, including specific types of soda, and risk of hip fracture in postmenopausal women., Design: An analysis was conducted in postmenopausal women from the Nurses' Health Study cohort (n = 73,572). Diet was assessed at baseline by using a semiquantitative food-frequency questionnaire and updated approximately every 4 y. In ≤30 y of follow-up, we identified 1873 incident hip fractures. We computed RRs for hip fractures by the amount of soda consumption by using Cox proportional hazards models with adjustment for potential confounders., Results: In multivariable models, each additional serving of total soda per day was associated with a significant 14% increased risk of hip fracture (RR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.23). The attributable risk in our cohort for total soda consumption was 12.5%. Risk was significantly elevated in consumers of both regular soda (RR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.38) and diet soda (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.21) and also did not significantly differ between colas and noncolas or sodas with or without caffeine. The association between soda and hip fractures did not differ by body mass index or diagnosis of diabetes., Conclusion: Increased soda consumption of all types may be associated with increased risk of hip fracture in postmenopausal women; however, a clear mechanism was not apparent on the basis of these observational data., (© 2014 American Society for Nutrition.)