Suppr超能文献

一项在澳大利亚老年评估和管理服务中开展的药剂师主导出院带药的随机试验。

A randomised trial of pharmacist-led discharge prescribing in an Australian geriatric evaluation and management service.

机构信息

Royal Brisbane and Womens Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.

, Brisbane, Australia.

出版信息

Int J Clin Pharm. 2021 Aug;43(4):847-857. doi: 10.1007/s11096-020-01184-0. Epub 2020 Nov 2.

Abstract

Background Prescribing discharge medications is a potential "next step" for pharmacists in Australian hospitals, however, safety must be demonstrated via a randomised controlled study. Objective To determine if a collaborative, pharmacist led discharge prescribing model results in less patients with medication errors than conventional prescribing for both handwritten and digital prescriptions. Setting Geriatric Medical ward in a quaternary hospital, Australia Methods A prospective, single-blinded randomised controlled study of patients randomised to conventional (control) or a pharmacist-led prescribing (intervention) arms at discharge from hospital. This study had 2 phases; (1) handwritten prescribing and (2) digital prescribing. In addition, the two prescribing methods were compared. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with a medication error on their discharge prescription. Results In phase 1, 45 patients were recruited; 21 (control) and 24 (intervention). 95% of control patients and 29% in the intervention arm had at least one medication error, p < 0.0002, relative risk (RR) 0.31, confidence interval (CI) 0.16-0.58. The number of items with at least 1 error reduced from 69 to 4%; p < 0.0001, RR 0.06, CI 0.03-0.11 and fewer items had at least 1 clinically significant error (11% vs 2%, p = 0.0004, RR 0.15, CI 0.04-0.30). In phase 2, 39 patients were recruited; 18 (control) and 21 (intervention). 100% of control patients and 62% in the intervention arm had at least one medication error (p = 0.005, RR 0.62, CI 0.44-0.87). Items with at least 1 error decreased from 21 to 7% (p < 0.0001, RR 0.34, CI 0.44-0.56), there were fewer items with at least 1 clinically significant error (13% vs 5%, p < 0.003, RR 0.4, CI 0.22-0.72). There was no significant change in the primary outcome between handwritten and digital (60% vs 79%, p < 0.055). Conclusion In a geriatric setting, pharmacist-led partnered discharge prescribing results in significantly less patients with medication errors than the conventional method for both handwritten and digital methods.

摘要

背景

在澳大利亚医院,为患者开具出院带药可能成为药剂师的“下一步”,然而,这需要通过随机对照研究来确保安全性。目的:确定与传统处方模式相比,由药剂师主导的合作式出院带药模式是否能减少手写和电子处方的患者用药错误。地点:澳大利亚一家四级医院的老年医学病房。方法:前瞻性、单盲随机对照研究,将患者随机分配至传统(对照组)或由药剂师主导的处方(干预组)出院时。该研究有 2 个阶段:(1)手写处方,(2)电子处方。此外,还比较了这两种处方方法。主要结局指标:主要结局指标为出院处方上发生用药错误的患者比例。结果:在第 1 阶段,共纳入 45 名患者,其中 21 名为对照组,24 名为干预组。对照组 95%的患者和干预组 29%的患者至少有一处用药错误,p<0.0002,相对风险(RR)为 0.31,置信区间(CI)为 0.16-0.58。至少有一处错误的项目数从 69 项减少至 4%,p<0.0001,RR 为 0.06,CI 为 0.03-0.11,且至少有一处临床显著错误的项目数减少(11% vs 2%,p=0.0004,RR 为 0.15,CI 为 0.04-0.30)。在第 2 阶段,共纳入 39 名患者,其中 18 名为对照组,21 名为干预组。对照组 100%的患者和干预组 62%的患者至少有一处用药错误(p=0.005,RR 为 0.62,CI 为 0.44-0.87)。至少有一处错误的项目数从 21 项减少至 7%,p<0.0001,RR 为 0.34,CI 为 0.44-0.56,且至少有一处临床显著错误的项目数减少(13% vs 5%,p<0.003,RR 为 0.4,CI 为 0.22-0.72)。手写处方和电子处方的主要结局之间无显著差异(60% vs 79%,p<0.055)。结论:在老年人群中,与传统方法相比,由药剂师主导的合作式出院带药模式可显著减少用药错误,无论处方是手写还是电子。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验