Jo-Anne S Wilson1, Matthew A Ladda2, Jaclyn Tran3, Marsha Wood4, Penelope Poyah5, Steven Soroka6, Glenn Rodrigues2, Karthik Tennankore7. 1. , BScPharm, ACPR, PharmD, is with the College of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Professions, Dalhousie University, and the Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority Renal Program, Central Zone, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 2. , BScPharm, is with the College of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Professions, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 3. , BScPharm, ACPR, is with the Nova Scotia Health Authority Renal Program, Central Zone, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 4. , RN, NP, is with the Nova Scotia Health Authority Renal Program, Central Zone, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 5. , MD, FRCPC, is with the Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, and the Division of Nephrology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 6. , MD, MSc, FRCPC, is with the Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, and the Division of Nephrology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 7. , MD, MSc, SM, FRCPC, is with the Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, and the Division of Nephrology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ambulatory medication reconciliation can reduce the frequency of medication discrepancies and may also reduce adverse drug events. Patients receiving dialysis are at high risk for medication discrepancies because they typically have multiple comorbid conditions, are taking many medications, and are receiving care from many practitioners. Little is known about the potential benefits of ambulatory medication reconciliation for these patients. OBJECTIVES: To determine the number, type, and potential level of harm associated with medication discrepancies identified through ambulatory medication reconciliation and to ascertain the views of community pharmacists and family physicians about this service. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved patients initiating hemodialysis who received ambulatory medication reconciliation in a hospital renal program over the period July 2014 to July 2016. Discrepancies identified on the medication reconciliation forms for study patients were extracted and categorized by discrepancy type and potential level of harm. The level of harm was determined independently by a pharmacist and a nurse practitioner using a defined scoring system. In the event of disagreement, a nephrologist determined the final score. Surveys were sent to 52 community pharmacists and 44 family physicians involved in the care of study patients to collect their opinions and perspectives on ambulatory medication reconciliation. RESULTS: Ambulatory medication reconciliation was conducted 296 times for a total of 147 hemodialysis patients. The mean number of discrepancies identified per patient was 1.31 (standard deviation 2.00). Overall, 30% of these discrepancies were deemed to have the potential to cause moderate to severe patient discomfort or clinical deterioration. Survey results indicated that community practitioners found ambulatory medication reconciliation valuable for providing quality care to dialysis patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided evidence that ambulatory medication reconciliation can increase patient safety and potentially prevent adverse events associated with medication discrepancies.
BACKGROUND: Ambulatory medication reconciliation can reduce the frequency of medication discrepancies and may also reduce adverse drug events. Patients receiving dialysis are at high risk for medication discrepancies because they typically have multiple comorbid conditions, are taking many medications, and are receiving care from many practitioners. Little is known about the potential benefits of ambulatory medication reconciliation for these patients. OBJECTIVES: To determine the number, type, and potential level of harm associated with medication discrepancies identified through ambulatory medication reconciliation and to ascertain the views of community pharmacists and family physicians about this service. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved patients initiating hemodialysis who received ambulatory medication reconciliation in a hospital renal program over the period July 2014 to July 2016. Discrepancies identified on the medication reconciliation forms for study patients were extracted and categorized by discrepancy type and potential level of harm. The level of harm was determined independently by a pharmacist and a nurse practitioner using a defined scoring system. In the event of disagreement, a nephrologist determined the final score. Surveys were sent to 52 community pharmacists and 44 family physicians involved in the care of study patients to collect their opinions and perspectives on ambulatory medication reconciliation. RESULTS: Ambulatory medication reconciliation was conducted 296 times for a total of 147 hemodialysis patients. The mean number of discrepancies identified per patient was 1.31 (standard deviation 2.00). Overall, 30% of these discrepancies were deemed to have the potential to cause moderate to severe patient discomfort or clinical deterioration. Survey results indicated that community practitioners found ambulatory medication reconciliation valuable for providing quality care to dialysis patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided evidence that ambulatory medication reconciliation can increase patient safety and potentially prevent adverse events associated with medication discrepancies.
Authors: Patricia L Cornish; Sandra R Knowles; Romina Marchesano; Vincent Tam; Steven Shadowitz; David N Juurlink; Edward E Etchells Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2005-02-28
Authors: Harold J Manley; Cory G Garvin; Debra K Drayer; Gerald M Reid; Walter L Bender; Timothy K Neufeld; Sudarshan Hebbar; Richard S Muther Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2004-05-05 Impact factor: 5.992