Denise J van der Nat1, Margot Taks1, Victor J B Huiskes2, Bart J F van den Bemt3, Hein A W van Onzenoort4. 1. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Pharmacy, St. Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Pharmacy, St. Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Department of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands; Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Toxicology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: HvanOnzenoort@amphia.nl.
Abstract
AIM: Medication discrepancies (MDs), defined as unexplained differences among medication regimens, cause important public health problems with clinical and economic consequences. Medication reconciliation (MR) reduces the risk of MDs, but is time consuming and its success relies on the quality of different information sources. Online personalized health records (PHRs) may overcome these drawbacks. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the level of agreement of identified MDs between traditional MR and an online PHR and the correctness of the identified MDs with a PHR. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted at the cardiology, neurology, internal medicine and pulmonary department of the Amphia Hospital, the Netherlands. Two weeks prior to a planned admission all patients received an invitation from a PHR to update their medication file derived from the Nationwide Medication Record System (NMRS). At admission MR was performed with all by a pharmacy technician, who created the best possible medication history (BPMH) based on the NMRS data and an interview. MDs were determined as discrepancies between the available information from the NMRS and the input and alterations patients or pharmacy technician made. The number, correctness of patients' alterations, type and severity of identified MDs were analysed. RESULTS: Of 488 patients approached, 155 (31.8 %) patients who both used the PHR and had received MR were included. The mean number of MDs identified with MR and PHR was 6.2 (SD 4.3) and 4.7 (SD 3.7), respectively. 82.1 % of the drug information noted by the patient in the PHR was correct compared to the BPMH and 98.6 % had no clinically relevant differences between the lists. CONCLUSION: Patients who used an online PHR can relatively accurately record a list of their medication. Further research is required to explore the level of agreement and the correctness of a PHR in other (larger) hospital(departments).
AIM: Medication discrepancies (MDs), defined as unexplained differences among medication regimens, cause important public health problems with clinical and economic consequences. Medication reconciliation (MR) reduces the risk of MDs, but is time consuming and its success relies on the quality of different information sources. Online personalized health records (PHRs) may overcome these drawbacks. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the level of agreement of identified MDs between traditional MR and an online PHR and the correctness of the identified MDs with a PHR. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted at the cardiology, neurology, internal medicine and pulmonary department of the Amphia Hospital, the Netherlands. Two weeks prior to a planned admission all patients received an invitation from a PHR to update their medication file derived from the Nationwide Medication Record System (NMRS). At admission MR was performed with all by a pharmacy technician, who created the best possible medication history (BPMH) based on the NMRS data and an interview. MDs were determined as discrepancies between the available information from the NMRS and the input and alterations patients or pharmacy technician made. The number, correctness of patients' alterations, type and severity of identified MDs were analysed. RESULTS: Of 488 patients approached, 155 (31.8 %) patients who both used the PHR and had received MR were included. The mean number of MDs identified with MR and PHR was 6.2 (SD 4.3) and 4.7 (SD 3.7), respectively. 82.1 % of the drug information noted by the patient in the PHR was correct compared to the BPMH and 98.6 % had no clinically relevant differences between the lists. CONCLUSION:Patients who used an online PHR can relatively accurately record a list of their medication. Further research is required to explore the level of agreement and the correctness of a PHR in other (larger) hospital(departments).
Authors: Denise J van der Nat; Victor J B Huiskes; Margot Taks; Bart P H Pouls; Bart J F van den Bemt; Hein A W van Onzenoort Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 2.908
Authors: Denise J van der Nat; Margot Taks; Victor J B Huiskes; Bart J F van den Bemt; Hein A W van Onzenoort Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2022-01-15
Authors: Julianne E Brady; Amy M Linsky; Steven R Simon; Kate Yeksigian; Amy Rubin; Alan J Zillich; Alissa L Russ-Jara Journal: JMIR Hum Factors Date: 2022-08-03
Authors: Denise J van der Nat; Victor J B Huiskes; Aatke van der Maas; Judith Y M N Derijks-Engwegen; Hein A W van Onzenoort; Bart J F van den Bemt Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-08-05 Impact factor: 2.908