Korey A Kennelty1, Matthew J Witry2, Michael Gehring3, Melissa Dattalo3, Nicole Rogus-Pulia3. 1. William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), 2500 Overlook Terrace, 11G, Madison, WI 53705, USA; University of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Pharmacy, Social and Administrative Sciences Division, Madison, WI 53705, USA; University of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI 53075, USA. Electronic address: kennelty@wisc.edu. 2. The University of Iowa, College of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA. 3. William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), 2500 Overlook Terrace, 11G, Madison, WI 53705, USA; University of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI 53075, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No methodological standards are available for researchers and clinicians to examine medication discrepancies between health care settings. Systematic methods of examining medication discrepancies will allow researchers and clinicians to better understand factors driving medication discrepancies, to better measure effects of medication reconciliation interventions, and to compare findings across studies. OBJECTIVE: This article proposes a four-phase approach for systematically collecting medication data and measuring medication discrepancies between a hospital and community pharmacies. Methodologic considerations related to studying medication discrepancies in health services research are also discussed. METHODS: A multi-disciplinary study team developed a four-phase systematic approach to improve quality of data and study rigor: 1) operationalization of a medication discrepancy, 2) acquiring medication data, 3) abstraction of medication data and creation of dataset, and 4) measuring and reporting medication discrepancies. RESULTS: Using this phase-based approach, the study team successfully identified and reported medication discrepancies between a hospital and community pharmacies at the patient, medication, and community pharmacy units of analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Systematically measuring medication discrepancies that occur in the care transitions process is a critical step as researchers, clinicians, and other stakeholders work to improve health care quality and patient outcomes. This article detailed how a phase-based approach can be used in research to examine medication discrepancies as well as address the complexity of collecting medication data and analyzing medication discrepancies. Such methods should be considered when developing, conducting, and reporting research on medication discrepancies. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: No methodological standards are available for researchers and clinicians to examine medication discrepancies between health care settings. Systematic methods of examining medication discrepancies will allow researchers and clinicians to better understand factors driving medication discrepancies, to better measure effects of medication reconciliation interventions, and to compare findings across studies. OBJECTIVE: This article proposes a four-phase approach for systematically collecting medication data and measuring medication discrepancies between a hospital and community pharmacies. Methodologic considerations related to studying medication discrepancies in health services research are also discussed. METHODS: A multi-disciplinary study team developed a four-phase systematic approach to improve quality of data and study rigor: 1) operationalization of a medication discrepancy, 2) acquiring medication data, 3) abstraction of medication data and creation of dataset, and 4) measuring and reporting medication discrepancies. RESULTS: Using this phase-based approach, the study team successfully identified and reported medication discrepancies between a hospital and community pharmacies at the patient, medication, and community pharmacy units of analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Systematically measuring medication discrepancies that occur in the care transitions process is a critical step as researchers, clinicians, and other stakeholders work to improve health care quality and patient outcomes. This article detailed how a phase-based approach can be used in research to examine medication discrepancies as well as address the complexity of collecting medication data and analyzing medication discrepancies. Such methods should be considered when developing, conducting, and reporting research on medication discrepancies. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adverse drug events; Community pharmacy; Medication discrepancies; Transitions of care
Authors: Vincent C Tam; Sandra R Knowles; Patricia L Cornish; Nowell Fine; Romina Marchesano; Edward E Etchells Journal: CMAJ Date: 2005-08-30 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Pankdeep T Chhabra; Gail B Rattinger; Sarah K Dutcher; Melanie E Hare; Kelly L Parsons; Ilene H Zuckerman Journal: Res Social Adm Pharm Date: 2011-04-21
Authors: Josh F Peterson; Yaping Shi; Josh C Denny; Michael E Matheny; Jonathan S Schildcrout; Lemuel R Waitman; Randolph A Miller Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2010-11-13
Authors: Jove Graham; Janet Tomcavage; Doreen Salek; Joann Sciandra; Duane E Davis; Walter F Stewart Journal: Med Care Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Jennifer R Pippins; Tejal K Gandhi; Claus Hamann; Chima D Ndumele; Stephanie A Labonville; Ellen K Diedrichsen; Marcy G Carty; Andrew S Karson; Ishir Bhan; Christopher M Coley; Catherine L Liang; Alexander Turchin; Patricia C McCarthy; Jeffrey L Schnipper Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-06-19 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Carol P Roth; Ian D Coulter; Lisa S Kraus; Gery W Ryan; Gary Jacob; Joyce S Marks; Eric L Hurwitz; Howard Vernon; Paul G Shekelle; Patricia M Herman Journal: J Manipulative Physiol Ther Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 1.437
Authors: Jessica E Lockery; Jason Rigby; Taya A Collyer; Ashley C Stewart; Robyn L Woods; John J McNeil; Christopher M Reid; Michael E Ernst Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-12-27 Impact factor: 3.240