Chamoun Nibal R, Zeenny Rony, Mansour Hanine
Lebanese American University School of Pharmacy, Byblos, Lebanon.
Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, Lebanese American University, 211 E. 46th St., New York, NY, 10017-2935, USA.
Int J Clin Pharm. 2016 Dec;38(6):1436-1444. doi: 10.1007/s11096-016-0384-4. Epub 2016 Oct 21.
Background Pharmacists' involvement in patient care has improved the quality of care and reduced medication errors. However, this has required a lot of work that could not have been accomplished without documentation of interventions. Several means of documenting errors have been proposed in the literature but without a consistent comprehensive process. Recently, the American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) recognized that pharmacy practice lacks a consistent process for direct patient care and discussed several options for a pharmaceutical care plan, essentially encompassing medication therapy assessment, development and implementation of a pharmaceutical care plan and finally evaluation of the outcome. Therefore, as per the recommendations of ACCP, we sought to retrospectively analyze interventions by grouping them according to medication related problems (MRP) and their nodes such as prescribing; administering; monitoring; documenting and dispensing. Objective The aim of this study is to report interventions according to medication error (ME) nodes and show the impact of pharmacy interventions in reducing MRPs. Setting The study was conducted at the cardiology and infectious diseases services at a teaching hospital located in Beirut, Lebanon. Methods Intervention documentation was completed by pharmacy students on infectious diseases and cardiology rotations then reviewed by clinical pharmacists with respective specialties. Before data analysis, a new pharmacy reporting sheet was developed in order to link interventions according to MRP. Then, MRPs were grouped in the five ME nodes. During the documentation process, whether MRP had reached the patient or not may have not been reported which prevented the classification to the corresponding medication error nodes as ME. Main outcome Reduction in medication related problems across all ME nodes. Results A total of n = 1174 interventions were documented. N = 1091 interventions were classified as MRPs. Interventions were analyzed per 1000 patient days and resulted in 340 medication related problem/1000 patient days. A 72 % reduction in MRP across all ME nodes was seen. The majority of interventions were in the field of cardiology followed by infectious disease related. When interventions per ME nodes were analyzed, a high percentage of intervention acceptance was noted across all nodes especially prescribing (68.30 %) monitoring (77.7 %) and in documenting errors (79.36 %). Conclusion The role of pharmacists in reducing preventable MRPs can be shown when pharmacy interventions are analyzed according to corresponding MRP and ME nodes.
背景 药剂师参与患者护理提高了护理质量并减少了用药错误。然而,这需要大量工作,若没有干预记录则无法完成。文献中已提出多种记录错误的方法,但缺乏一致的综合流程。最近,美国临床药学会(ACCP)认识到药学实践缺乏直接患者护理的一致流程,并讨论了药物治疗护理计划的几种选择,主要包括药物治疗评估、药物治疗护理计划的制定与实施以及最终结果评估。因此,根据ACCP的建议,我们试图通过根据用药相关问题(MRP)及其节点(如处方开具、给药、监测、记录和调配)对干预措施进行分组来进行回顾性分析。
目的 本研究的目的是根据用药错误(ME)节点报告干预措施,并展示药学干预在减少MRP方面的影响。
设置 该研究在黎巴嫩贝鲁特一家教学医院的心脏病科和传染病科进行。
方法 药学专业学生完成传染病和心脏病学轮转中的干预记录,然后由各专科的临床药师进行审核。在数据分析之前,制定了一份新的药学报告表,以便根据MRP将干预措施联系起来。然后,将MRP归入五个ME节点。在记录过程中,可能未报告MRP是否已影响到患者,这妨碍了将其分类到相应的用药错误节点作为ME。
主要结果 所有ME节点用药相关问题的减少。
结果 共记录了n = 1174项干预措施。N = 1091项干预措施被归类为MRP。每1000个患者日分析干预措施,结果为每1000个患者日有340个用药相关问题。所有ME节点的MRP减少了72%。大多数干预措施发生在心脏病学领域,其次是传染病相关领域。当按ME节点分析干预措施时,所有节点的干预接受率都很高,尤其是处方开具(68.30%)监测(77.7%)和记录错误(79.36%)。
结论 当根据相应的MRP和ME节点分析药学干预措施时,可以显示药剂师在减少可预防的MRP方面的作用。