BACKGROUND: At the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia), it is standard practice to perform medication reconciliation at patient discharge. Although pharmacists historically were available to assist resident physicians in the discharge medication reconciliation process, the process was never standardized. An internal review showed a 60%-70% rate of pharmacist review of discharge medication lists, potentially enabling medication errors to go unnoticed during transitions of care. In response, a medical resident- and pharmacist-led collaboration was designed, and a pre-post-intervention study was conducted to assess its effectiveness. METHODS: A new work flow was established in which house staff notified pharmacists when a preliminary discharge medication list was ready for reconciliation and provided access for pharmacists to correct medication errors in the electronic discharge document with physician approval. Length of stay, average time of day of patient discharge, and readmission data were compared in the pre- and post-intervention periods. RESULTS: There were 981 discharges in the preintervention period and 1,207 in the postintervention period. The rate of pharmacist reconciliation increased from 64.0% to 82.4% after the intervention (p<.0001). The average number of errors identified and corrected by pharmacists decreased from 0.979 to 0.862 per discharge (p<.0001). There was no significant change in readmission rates or time of discharge after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Redesigning the discharge medication reconciliation process in a teaching hospital to include a review of medical resident discharge medication lists by pharmacists provided more opportunities for discharge medication error identification and correction.
BACKGROUND: At the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia), it is standard practice to perform medication reconciliation at patient discharge. Although pharmacists historically were available to assist resident physicians in the discharge medication reconciliation process, the process was never standardized. An internal review showed a 60%-70% rate of pharmacist review of discharge medication lists, potentially enabling medication errors to go unnoticed during transitions of care. In response, a medical resident- and pharmacist-led collaboration was designed, and a pre-post-intervention study was conducted to assess its effectiveness. METHODS: A new work flow was established in which house staff notified pharmacists when a preliminary discharge medication list was ready for reconciliation and provided access for pharmacists to correct medication errors in the electronic discharge document with physician approval. Length of stay, average time of day of patient discharge, and readmission data were compared in the pre- and post-intervention periods. RESULTS: There were 981 discharges in the preintervention period and 1,207 in the postintervention period. The rate of pharmacist reconciliation increased from 64.0% to 82.4% after the intervention (p<.0001). The average number of errors identified and corrected by pharmacists decreased from 0.979 to 0.862 per discharge (p<.0001). There was no significant change in readmission rates or time of discharge after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Redesigning the discharge medication reconciliation process in a teaching hospital to include a review of medical resident discharge medication lists by pharmacists provided more opportunities for discharge medication error identification and correction.
Authors: Robin Lee; Suzanne Malfair; Jordan Schneider; Sukjinder Sidhu; Caitlin Lang; Nina Bredenkamp; Shu Fei Sophie Liang; Alice Hou; Adil Virani Journal: Can J Hosp Pharm Date: 2018-04-30