-
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Jun 2023In-hospital prescribing errors (PEs) may result in patient harm, prolonged hospitalization and hospital (re)admission. These events are associated with pressure on... (Review)
Review
AIM
In-hospital prescribing errors (PEs) may result in patient harm, prolonged hospitalization and hospital (re)admission. These events are associated with pressure on healthcare services and significant healthcare costs. To develop targeted interventions to prevent or reduce in-hospital PEs, identification and understanding of facilitating and protective factors influencing in-hospital PEs in current daily practice is necessary, adopting a Safety-II perspective. The aim of this systematic review was to create an overview of all factors reported in the literature, both protective and facilitating, as influencing in-hospital PEs.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE.com and the Cochrane Library (via Wiley) were searched, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement, for studies that identified factors influencing in-hospital PEs. Both qualitative and quantitative study designs were included.
RESULTS
Overall, 19 articles (6 qualitative and 13 quantitative studies) were included and 40 unique factors influencing in-hospital PEs were identified. These factors were categorized into five domains according to the Eindhoven classification ('organization-related', 'prescriber-related', 'prescription-related', 'technology-related' and 'unclassified') and visualized in an Ishikawa (Fishbone) diagram. Most of the identified factors (87.5%; n = 40) facilitated in-hospital PEs. The most frequently identified facilitating factor (39.6%; n = 19) was 'insufficient (drug) knowledge, prescribing skills and/or experience of prescribers'.
CONCLUSION
The findings of this review could be used to identify points of engagement for future intervention studies and help hospitals determine how to optimize prescribing. A multifaceted intervention, targeting multiple factors might help to circumvent the complex challenge of in-hospital PEs.
Topics: Humans; Health Care Costs; Hospitals; Knowledge; Patient Harm; Protective Factors
PubMed: 36805648
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15694 -
BMJ Quality & Safety Jun 2023Despite recommendations, documentation of indication on prescriptions and inpatient medication orders is not routinely practised. There has been a recent systematic...
BACKGROUND
Despite recommendations, documentation of indication on prescriptions and inpatient medication orders is not routinely practised. There has been a recent systematic review of indication documentation for antimicrobials, but not for interventions relating to indication documentation for medication more broadly. Our aims were to 1) identify, describe and synthesise the literature relating to effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving indication documentation and/or indication-based prescribing in both primary and secondary healthcare; 2) synthesise participant perspectives to identify barriers and facilitators to these interventions; and 3) make recommendations for both practice and research.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, Embase and CINAHL using two search concepts: electronic prescribing systems, and indication documentation and/or indication-based prescribing. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies were included; outcome measures and results were extracted to produce a narrative synthesis. Quality appraisal by two independent reviewers was undertaken using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
RESULTS
We identified 21 studies evaluating interventions to aid indication documentation. Indication documentation was either via free-text, selection from a list, or by use of pre-defined indication-based order sentences for individual medications. For a number of outcomes, there was a mostly positive impact, including appropriateness of the medication order (6 of 8 studies), rates of prescribing error (2/2) and some less commonly reported clinical (2/4) and workflow-related outcomes (2/3). There was a less favourable impact on accuracy of indication documentation and rates of medication use, highlighting some unintended consequences that may occur when implementing new interventions. Participant insights from prescribers and other healthcare professionals complemented quantitative study results, highlighting both facilitators and barriers to indication documentation and the associated interventions. For example, barriers included long drop-down lists and the need to use workarounds to navigate approval systems due to time or knowledge constraints. Facilitating factors included the perceived benefits of indication documentation on communication among the healthcare team and with the patient.
CONCLUSION
Indication documentation has the potential to improve appropriate prescribing and reduce prescribing errors. However, further benefits to the prescriber, multidisciplinary team and patient may only be realised by developing methods of indication documentation that integrate more efficiently with prescriber workflows.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021278495.
Topics: Humans; Electronic Prescribing; Narration; Health Personnel; Communication; Documentation
PubMed: 36788034
DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2022-015452 -
Pathogens and Global Health Jul 2023Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a substantial risk to public health. In low-income and middle-income (LMICs) nations, the impact of AMR is significantly more... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) poses a substantial risk to public health. In low-income and middle-income (LMICs) nations, the impact of AMR is significantly more severe. The absence of data from low-income countries (LMICs) causes this topic to be frequently overlooked. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic could make the AMR issue even worse. Earlier guidelines recommended antibiotic use in patients with COVID-19, even in those without bacterial coinfection. This study aims to investigate the proportion of antibiotic prescriptions in LMICs among patients with and without coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), the proportion of inappropriate antibiotics, and multi-antibiotic prescribing. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). We retrieved data through online databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. Amongst COVID-19 patients, the meta-analytic estimate of antibiotic prescription was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72-0.88), whereas antibiotic use among patients with non-COVID-19 infections was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49-0.58). Half of those prescribed antibiotics (0.52, 95% CI: 0.32-0.72) are inappropriate prescriptions. In addition, we found that one-third of antibiotics prescriptions consisted of more than one antibiotic (0.32, 95% CI: 0.21-0.43). In conclusion, antibiotics are highly prescribed across LMICs, and their use is increased in patients with COVID-19. Amongst those prescriptions, inappropriate and multiple use was not uncommon. This study has several limitations, as it included two studies in an ambulatory setting, and some of the studies included in the analysis were conducted on a small scale. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that urgent action to improve prescribing practices is essential.
Topics: Prevalence; Humans; COVID-19; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Developing Countries; Prescriptions; Inappropriate Prescribing
PubMed: 36562085
DOI: 10.1080/20477724.2022.2160892 -
Annales Pharmaceutiques Francaises May 2023The use of electronic systems in prescription is considered as the final solution to overcome the many problems of the paper transcription process, especially with the... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The use of electronic systems in prescription is considered as the final solution to overcome the many problems of the paper transcription process, especially with the outbreak of Coronavirus needs more attention than before. But despite the many advantages, its implementation faces many challenges and obstacles. Therefore, the present study was conducted to review the effectiveness of computerized physician order entry systems (CPOE) on relative risk reduction on medication error and adverse drug events (ADE).
METHOD
This study is one of the systematic review studies that was conducted in 2021. In this study, searching for keywords such as E-Electronic Prescription, Patient safety, Medication Errors prescription, Drug Interactions, orginal articles from 2000 to October-2020 in the valid databases such as ISI web of Science PubMed Embase, Scopus and search engines like google was done. The included studies were based on the main objectives of the study and based on the inclusion criteria after several stages of review and quality evaluation. In fact, the main criteria for selecting articles were studies that compared the rate of medication errors with or without assessing the associated harms (real or potential) before and after the implementation of EMS.
RESULTS
Out of 110 selected studies after initial screening, only 16 articles were selected due to their relevance. Among the final studies, there was a significant heterogeneity. Only 6 studies were of good quality. Of the 10 studies prescribing error rates, 9 reported reductions, but variable denominators prevented meta-analysis. Twelve studies provided specific examples of systemic drug errors. 5 cases reported their occurrence slightly. Out of 9 cases that analyzed the effects on drug error rate, 7 cases showed a significant relative reduction between 13 and 99%. Four of the six studies that analyzed the effects on potential ADEs showed a significant relative reduction of between 35 and 98%. Two of the four studies that analyzed the effect of ADEs showed a relative reduction of between 30 and 84%.
CONCLUSION
Finally, e-prescribing seems to reduce the risk of medication errors and ADE. However, the studies differed significantly in terms of setting, design, quality and results. More randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to further improve the evidence of health informatics information.
Topics: Humans; Electronic Prescribing; Medication Errors; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Medical Order Entry Systems; Patient Safety
PubMed: 36513154
DOI: 10.1016/j.pharma.2022.12.002 -
JMIR MHealth and UHealth Nov 2022Along with the rapid growth of the global aging society, the mobile and health digital market has expanded greatly. Countless mobile medical apps (mmApps) have sprung up... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Along with the rapid growth of the global aging society, the mobile and health digital market has expanded greatly. Countless mobile medical apps (mmApps) have sprung up in the internet market, aiming to help patients with chronic diseases achieve medication safety.
OBJECTIVE
Based on the medication safety action plans proposed by the World Health Organization, we aimed to explore the effectiveness of mmApps in ensuring the medication safety of patients with chronic diseases, including whether mmApps can improve the willingness to report adverse drug events (ADEs), improve patients' medication adherence, and reduce medication errors. We hoped to verify our hypothesis through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
The meta-analysis was performed in strict accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and included literature searched from 7 databases-PubMed, Web Of Science, Embase, CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and SinoMed. The publication time was limited to the time of database establishment to April 30, 2022. Studies were screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data extracted included authors, years of publication, countries or regions, participants' characteristics, intervention groups, and control groups, among others. Our quality assessment followed the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 6.3. RevMan 5.2 software (Cochrane Collaboration) was used to analyze the statistical data, and a sensitivity analysis was performed to assess data stability. The degree of stability was calculated by using a different statistical method and excluding large-sample studies from the analysis.
RESULTS
We included 8 studies from 5 countries (China, the United States, France, Canada, and Spain) that were published from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2021. The total number of participants was 1355, and we analyzed the characteristics of included studies, each app's features, the risk of bias, and quality. The results showed that mmApps could increase ADE reporting willingness (relative risk [RR] 2.59, 95% CI 1.26-5.30; P=.009) and significantly improve medication adherence (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04-1.31; P=.007), but they had little effect on reducing medication errors (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.33-7.29; P=.58).
CONCLUSIONS
We analyzed the following three merits of mmApps, with regard to facilitating the willingness to report ADEs: mmApps facilitate more communication between patients and physicians, patients attach more importance to ADE reporting, and the processing of results is transparent. The use of mmApps improved medication adherence among patients with chronic diseases by conveying medical solutions, providing educational support, tracking medications, and allowing for remote consultations. Finally, we found 3 potential reasons for why our medication error results differed from those of other studies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022322072; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=322072.
Topics: Humans; Mobile Applications; Chronic Disease; Medication Adherence; China; Canada
PubMed: 36413386
DOI: 10.2196/39819 -
South African Medical Journal =... Aug 2022To improve maternal health, studies of maternal morbidity are increasingly being used to evaluate the quality of maternity care, in addition to studies of mortality....
BACKGROUND
To improve maternal health, studies of maternal morbidity are increasingly being used to evaluate the quality of maternity care, in addition to studies of mortality. While South Africa (SA) has a well-established confidential enquiry into maternal deaths, there is currently no structure in place to systematically collect and analyse maternal near-misses (MNMs) at national level.
OBJECTIVES
To synthesise MNM indicators and causes in SA by performing a systematic literature search, and to investigate perceived needs for data collection related to MNMs and determine whether the MNM tool from the World Health Organization (WHO-MNM) would require adaptations in order to be implemented.
METHODS
The study used a mixed-methods approach. A systematic literature search was conducted to find all published data on MNM audits in SA. Semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually with maternal health experts throughout the country who had been involved in studies of MNMs, and main themes arising in the interviews were synthesised. A method for MNM data collection for SA use was discussed with these experts.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded 797 articles, 15 of which met the WHO-MNM or Mantel et al. severe acute maternal morbidity criteria. The median (interquartile range) MNM incidence ratio in SA was 8.4/1 000 (5.6 - 8.7) live births, the median maternal mortality ratio was 130/100 000 (71.4 - 226) live births, and the median mortality index was 16.6% (11.7 - 18.8). The main causes of MNMs were hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and obstetric haemorrhage. Eight maternal health experts were interviewed from May 2020 to February 2021. All participants focused on the challenges of implementing a national MNM audit, yet noted the urgent need for one. Recognition of MNMs as an indicator of quality of maternity care was considered to lead to improved management earlier in the chain of events, thereby possibly preventing mortality. Obtaining qualitative information from women with MNMs was perceived as an important opportunity to improve the maternity care system. Participants suggested that the WHO-MNM tool would have to be adapted into a simplified tool with more clearly defined criteria and a number of specific diagnoses relevant to the SA setting. This 'Maternal near-miss: Inclusion criteria and data collection form' is provided as a supplementary file.
CONCLUSION
Adding MNMs to the existing confidential maternal death enquiry could potentially contribute to a more robust audit with data that may inform health systems planning. This was perceived by SA experts to be valuable, but would require context-specific adaptations to the WHO-MNM tool. The available body of evidence is sufficient to justify moving to implementation.
Topics: Female; Humans; Maternal Death; Maternal Health Services; Maternal Mortality; Near Miss, Healthcare; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; South Africa
PubMed: 36214035
DOI: 10.7196/SAMJ.2022.v112.i9.16248 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2022We aimed to systematically review the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in older adults in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) in all care settings....
We aimed to systematically review the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in older adults in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) in all care settings. We searched Embase and MEDLINE (up to June 2019) and checked the reference lists of the included studies and relevant reviews. Eligible studies used validated explicit or implicit tools to assess the PIP prevalence in older adults in CEE. All study designs were considered, except case‒control studies and case series. We assessed the risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal Tool and the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Meta-analysis was inappropriate due to heterogeneity in the outcome measurements. Therefore, we used the synthesis without meta-analysis approach-summarizing effect estimates method. This review included twenty-seven studies with 139,693 participants. Most studies were cross-sectional and conducted in high-income countries. The data synthesis across 26 studies revealed the PIP prevalence: the median was 34.6%, the interquartile range was 25.9-63.2%, and the range was 6.5-95.8%. The certainty of this evidence was very low due to the risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. These findings show that PIP is a prevalent issue in the CEE region. Further well-designed studies conducted across countries are needed to strengthen the existing evidence and increase the generalizability of findings.
Topics: Aged; Case-Control Studies; Europe; Europe, Eastern; Humans; Inappropriate Prescribing; Prevalence
PubMed: 36202826
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-19860-8 -
BMC Geriatrics Sep 2022Adrenergic alpha-1 receptor antagonists (alpha-1 antagonists) are frequently used medications in the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of adrenergic alpha-1 receptor antagonists in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis supporting the development of recommendations to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing.
BACKGROUND
Adrenergic alpha-1 receptor antagonists (alpha-1 antagonists) are frequently used medications in the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and in the management of therapy-resistant arterial hypertension, two conditions frequently found in older adults. This systematic review aims at presenting a complete overview of evidence over the benefits and risks of alpha-1 antagonist treatment in people ≥ 65 years, and at deriving recommendations for a safe application of alpha-1 antagonists in older adults from the evidence found.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed (last update March 25 2022) including multiple databases (Medline/Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library) and using the PICOS framework to define search terms. The selection of the studies was done by two independent reviewers in a two-step approach, followed by a systematic data extraction. Quality appraisal was performed for each study included using standardised appraisal tools. The studies retrieved and additional literature were used for the development of recommendations, which were rated for strength and quality according to the GRADE methodology.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies were included: 3 meta-analyses, 6 randomised controlled trials and 9 observational trials. Doxazosin in the management of arterial hypertension was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, particularly heart failure, than chlorthalidone. Regarding treatment of LUTS suggestive of BPH, alpha-1 antagonists appeared to be effective in the relief of urinary symptoms and improvement of quality of life. They seemed to be less effective in preventing disease progression. Analyses of the risk profile indicated an increase in vasodilation related adverse events and sexual adverse events for some agents. The risk of falls and fractures as well as the effects of long-term treatment remained unclear. All meta-analyses and 5 out of 6 interventional studies were downgraded in the quality appraisal. 7 out of 9 observational studies were of good quality.
CONCLUSIONS
It cannot be recommended to use doxazosin as first-line antihypertensive agent neither in older adults nor in younger patients. In the management of BPH alpha-1 antagonists promise to effectively relieve urinary symptoms with uncertainty regarding their efficacy in preventing long-term progression events.
Topics: Adrenergic alpha-1 Receptor Antagonists; Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists; Aged; Antihypertensive Agents; Chlorthalidone; Doxazosin; Humans; Hypertension; Inappropriate Prescribing; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms; Male; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Quality of Life
PubMed: 36171560
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-022-03415-7 -
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) Aug 2022Pharmacists are essential members of the healthcare team. The emergence of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led pharmacists to undertake... (Review)
Review
Pharmacists are essential members of the healthcare team. The emergence of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led pharmacists to undertake additional clinical roles. We aim to conduct a systematic review on the interventions and impact of pharmacist-delivered services in managing COVID-19 patients. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL plus, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Web of Science from 1 December 2019 (the first case of COVID-19 emerged) to 13 January 2022 to retrieve the articles. Cochrane handbook and PRISMA guidelines were followed respectively to perform and report the review. The pharmacist-led interventions were reported following the Descriptive Elements of Pharmacist Intervention Characterization Tool (DEPICT) version 2. The protocol of systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021277128). Studies quality was assessed with the modified NOS scale. In total, 7 observational studies were identified from 10,838 studies. Identification of dosage errors ( = 6 studies), regimen modifications ( = 5), removal of obsolete/duplicate medications ( = 5), identification and management of adverse drug reactions ( = 4), drug interactions prevention ( = 2), and physicians acceptance rate ( = 3) of therapy-related services delivered in-person or via tele-pharmacy were among the pharmacist-delivered services. Common interventions delivered by pharmacists also included optimizing the use of antibacterial, antivirals, and anticoagulants in COVID-19 infected patients. The acceptance of pharmacist-delivered services by physicians was high (88.5-95.5%). Included studies have described pharmacists' beneficial role in managing patients with COVID-19 including detection, resolution, and prevention of medication-related problems, with physicians demonstrating high trust in pharmacists' advice. Future research should assess the feasibility and scalability of such roles in real-world settings.
PubMed: 36141242
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10091630 -
Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband Der... Apr 2023Despite trends toward longer-lasting health, the complexity of older people's health problems is increasing, raising the need for interprofessional care in all settings....
BACKGROUND
Despite trends toward longer-lasting health, the complexity of older people's health problems is increasing, raising the need for interprofessional care in all settings. A lack of coordination among providers risks fragmented care, leading to a repetition or gaps in services, conflicting treatment recommendations, medication errors and higher costs. Accordingly, new integrated models of care are needed that are based on patient needs. Case and Care Management (CCM) is currently being tested in Germany in a variety of settings to improve care.
AIM OF THE STUDY
The aim of the present study was to analyze the results of health economic evaluations of CCM interventions in Germany in populations over 60 years of age compared to standard care.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The study is based on a systematic literature review conducted via Pubmed and Livivo and supplemented by a comprehensive hand search. The primary studies included for analysis were assessed using the CHEERS statement and narratively synthesized.
RESULTS
A total of five cost-effectiveness studies were included, predominantly based on randomized controlled trials. Results regarding cost effectiveness were mixed. Individual studies found significant differences on effectiveness and cost endpoints.
CONCLUSIONS
The mixed, small number of studies does not currently provide a clear picture of whether CCM interventions have health economic advantages over standard care. Further research is indicated. Innovation fund projects on the topic area are expected to generate new evidence in the future.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Aged; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Germany; Case Management
PubMed: 36126951
DOI: 10.1055/a-1845-1054