Canning Martin L, Munns Andrew, Tai Bonnie
Pharmacy Department, The Prince Charles Hospital, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Chermside, Queensland, Australia.
Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2018 Mar;25(e1):e52-e58. doi: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2016-001177. Epub 2017 Jul 11.
To determine the quality of best possible medication history (BPMH) taking activities undertaken by pharmacists. To identify factors which impact upon erroneous documentation. To assess risks associated with erroneous documentation of BPMH by pharmacists.
A clinical pharmacist randomly selected patients across a tertiary referral, metropolitan hospital over an 9-day period and documented comparator medication histories (CMHs) using a structured interview. BPMH documented by pharmacists as part of routine care and CMH were compared, and erroneous documentation was classified according to previous definitions in the literature. Erroneous documentation was risk stratified.
99 BPMH and CMH were compared. There were 14 medication omissions which occurred across 10 patients and 14 discrepancies across 12 patients. There was no association identified between erroneous documentation and pharmacist seniority/experience (p=0.25), where BPMH taken (p=0.7), day of week BPMH documented (p=0.45) or time since admission to when BPMH was documented (p=1). Patient age did not impact erroneous documentation rates (p=0.22). There was an association between the number of sources used to confirm a medication history and erroneous documentation incidence (p=0.035). The number of medications increased the rate of documentation error. While 85.19% (n=115) of erroneous documentation were deemed unlikely to cause patient discomfort or clinical deterioration, 1.48% (n=2) had the potential to result in severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.
Six out of seven BPMH documented by pharmacists as part of usual clinical practice are accurate. Major influences on accuracy include the number of medications and sources used. There is a low possibility that erroneous documentation by pharmacists will cause harm.
确定药剂师开展的最佳可能用药史(BPMH)记录活动的质量。识别影响错误记录的因素。评估药剂师对BPMH进行错误记录相关的风险。
一名临床药剂师在9天时间内,于一家大型三级转诊医院随机挑选患者,通过结构化访谈记录对照用药史(CMH)。将药剂师作为常规护理一部分记录的BPMH与CMH进行比较,并根据文献中先前的定义对错误记录进行分类。对错误记录进行风险分层。
比较了99份BPMH和CMH。10名患者出现了14例用药遗漏,12名患者出现了14处差异。未发现错误记录与药剂师资历/经验之间存在关联(p = 0.25),记录BPMH的地点(p = 0.7)、记录BPMH的星期几(p = 0.45)或从入院到记录BPMH的时间(p = 1)之间也无关联。患者年龄未影响错误记录率(p = 0.22)。用于确认用药史的信息来源数量与错误记录发生率之间存在关联(p = 0.035)。用药数量增加了记录错误率。虽然85.19%(n = 115)的错误记录被认为不太可能导致患者不适或临床恶化,但1.48%(n = 2)有可能导致严重不适或临床恶化。
药剂师在常规临床实践中记录的七份BPMH中有六份是准确的。对准确性的主要影响因素包括用药数量和信息来源数量。药剂师的错误记录造成伤害的可能性较低。