Department of Medicine, The Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
Department of Medicine, The Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan
BMJ Open Qual. 2024 Apr 2;13(2):e002527. doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002527.
There were three main objectives of the study: to determine the overall compliance of medication reconciliation over 4 years in a tertiary care hospital, to compare the medication reconciliation compliance between paper entry (initial assessment forms) and computerised physician order entry (CPOE), and to identify the discrepancies between the medication history taken by the physician at the time of admission and those collected by the pharmacist within 24 hours of admission.
This study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in a lower middle-income country. Data were gathered from two different sources. The first source involved retrospective data obtained from the Quality and Patient Safety Department (QPSD) of the hospital, consisting of records from 8776 patients between 2018 and 2021. The second data source was also retrospective from a quality project initiated by pharmacists at the hospital. Pharmacists collected data from 1105 patients between 2020 and 2021, specifically focusing on medication history and identifying any discrepancies compared with the history documented by physicians. The collected data were then analysed using SPSS V.26.
The QPSD noted an improvement in physician-led medication reconciliation, with a rise from 32.7% in 2018 to 69.4% in 2021 in CPOE. However, pharmacist-led medication reconciliation identified a 25.4% (n=281/1105) overall discrepancy in the medication history of patients admitted from 2020 to 2021, mainly due to incomplete medication records in the initial assessment forms and CPOE. Physicians missed critical drugs in 4.9% of records; pharmacists identified and updated them.
In a lower middle-income nation where hiring pharmacists to conduct medication reconciliation would be an additional cost burden for hospitals, encouraging physicians to record medication history more precisely would be a more workable method. However, in situations where cost is not an issue, it is recommended to adopt evidence-based practices, such as integrating clinical pharmacists to lead medication reconciliation, which is the gold standard worldwide.
本研究有三个主要目标:确定在一家三级保健医院进行药物重整的总体依从性,比较纸质录入(初始评估表)和计算机化医师医嘱录入(CPOE)之间的药物重整依从性,并确定医生在入院时所采集的药物史与药师在入院 24 小时内所采集的药物史之间的差异。
这项研究在一个中下等收入国家的一家三级保健医院进行。数据来自两个不同的来源。第一个来源是从医院的质量和患者安全部(QPSD)获得的回顾性数据,包括 2018 年至 2021 年期间 8776 名患者的记录。第二个数据来源也是来自医院药师发起的一项质量项目的回顾性数据。药师从 2020 年至 2021 年期间收集了 1105 名患者的数据,重点是药物史,并与医生记录的历史进行任何差异的识别。收集的数据使用 SPSS V.26 进行分析。
QPSD 注意到以医师为主导的药物重整有所改善,CPOE 从 2018 年的 32.7%上升到 2021 年的 69.4%。然而,药师主导的药物重整发现,2020 年至 2021 年入院的患者的药物史总体上存在 25.4%(n=281/1105)的差异,主要是由于初始评估表和 CPOE 中的药物记录不完整。医生在 4.9%的记录中遗漏了关键药物;药师识别并更新了这些药物。
在一个中下等收入国家,雇用药师进行药物重整会给医院带来额外的成本负担,鼓励医生更准确地记录药物史将是一种更可行的方法。然而,在成本不是问题的情况下,建议采用基于证据的实践,如整合临床药师来领导药物重整,这是全球的黄金标准。