Blog
About

0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Wie vollständig ist der Bundeseinheitliche Medikationsplan? Eine Analyse bei Krankenhausaufnahme Translated title: How complete is the Germany-wide standardised medication list (“Bundeseinheitlicher Medikationsplan”)? An analysis at hospital admission.

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Zusammenfassung

          Einleitung  Bei stationärer Aufnahme scheint die Aktualität und Vollständigkeit des Bundeseinheitlichen Medikationsplans häufig nicht gegeben. Ebenso ist unklar, welche Charakteristiken der Pläne die Wahrscheinlichkeit für Diskrepanzen erhöhen.

          Methoden  Retrospektiv wurden deshalb 100 Pläne, die zur Arzneimittelanamnese elektiver Patienten einer chirurgischen Klinik mitgebracht wurden, geprüft, ob und welche Abweichungen bestanden. Die Abweichungen wurden 7 Kategorien zugeordnet: Arzneimittel, das in der Anamnese erfasst wurde, fehlt auf dem Plan, Arzneimittel auf dem Plan wird nicht mehr eingenommen, Stärke oder Dosierung fehlt auf dem Plan bzw. ist falsch oder die Darreichungsform ist falsch dokumentiert. Hinweise zur Arzneimitteltherapiesicherheit, involvierte Arzneimittel und -formen wurden ebenfalls erfasst. Mithilfe multivariater Analysen wurde der Einfluss der Aktualität, der Anzahl der Arzneimittel und der ausstellenden Facharztdisziplin der Pläne auf die Art und Anzahl an Diskrepanzen untersucht.

          Ergebnisse  Zur Arzneimittelanamnese wiesen 78 % (78/100) der Pläne Abweichungen auf. Insgesamt wurden 226 Abweichungen (2,3 ± 0,6 Abweichungen/Anamnese) dokumentiert. Am häufigsten fehlte ein Arzneimittel auf dem Plan (n = 103). Von allen Hinweisen und Empfehlungen betrafen 64 % (83/177) das perioperative Management von Antithrombotika (n = 55) und Antidiabetika (n = 28). In der multivariaten Analyse stieg nur das Risiko für fehlerhafte Angaben bei Stärke und Dosierung mit dem Alter der Pläne signifikant (p = 0,047) und war um mehr als das 2-fache erhöht, wenn der Plan älter als einen Monat war.

          Diskussion  Die Aktualität, Vollständigkeit und Aspekte der Arzneimitteltherapiesicherheit des Bundeseinheitlichen Medikationsplans sollten umfassend und gezielt im Anamnesegespräch validiert werden. In der Praxis sollten Pläne, die älter als 1 Monat sind, besonders kritisch hinsichtlich Angaben zu Stärke und Dosierung geprüft und der Plan entsprechend regelmäßig aktualisiert werden.

          Abstract

          Background  At inpatient admission, the timeliness and completeness of the Germany-wide standardised medication list (“Bundeseinheitlicher Medikationsplan”) often seems inappropriate. It is also unclear which characteristics of the lists increase the probability of discrepancies.

          Methods  A total of 100 medication lists of elective patients of a surgical clinic were retrospectively evaluated with regard to potential discrepancies compared to the standardised medication reconciliation. The discprepancies were assigned to 7 categories: drug taken is missing on the list, drug on the list is no longer taken, strength or dosage is missing at the list or is incorrect, or the documented dosage form is different. Advice on patient safety, involved drugs and dosage forms were also recorded. Multivariate analyses were used to investigate the influence of the timeliness, number of drugs and issuing medical specialty of the lists on the type and number of discrepancies.

          Results  Compared to the medication reconciliation, 78 % (78/100) of the lists showed discrepancies. A total of 226 deviations (2.3 ± 0.6 deviations/list) were documented. Most often, a drug was missing from the list (n = 103). Of all recommendations, 64 % (83/177) concerned the perioperative management of anticoagulants (n = 55) and antidiabetics (n = 28), corresponding to 62 % (62/100) of the lists. In the multivariate analysis, only the risk of incorrect information on strength and dosage increased significantly with the age of the lists (p = 0.047) and was more than twice as high when the list was more than one month old.

          Conclusions  The timeliness, completeness and aspects of patient safety must be comprehensively validated. Medication lists that are older than 1 month should be checked particularly critically with regard to information on strength and dosage and the plan should be updated accordingly at regular intervals.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Incidence and preventability of adverse drug events among older persons in the ambulatory setting.

           Jerry Gurwitz (2003)
          Adverse drug events, especially those that may be preventable, are among the most serious concerns about medication use in older persons cared for in the ambulatory clinical setting. To assess the incidence and preventability of adverse drug events among older persons in the ambulatory clinical setting. Cohort study of all Medicare enrollees (30 397 person-years of observation) cared for by a multispecialty group practice during a 12-month study period (July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2000), in which possible drug-related incidents occurring in the ambulatory clinical setting were detected using multiple methods, including reports from health care providers; review of hospital discharge summaries; review of emergency department notes; computer-generated signals; automated free-text review of electronic clinic notes; and review of administrative incident reports concerning medication errors. Number of adverse drug events, severity of the events (classified as significant, serious, life-threatening, or fatal), and whether the events were preventable. There were 1523 identified adverse drug events, of which 27.6% (421) were considered preventable. The overall rate of adverse drug events was 50.1 per 1000 person-years, with a rate of 13.8 preventable adverse drug events per 1000 person-years. Of the adverse drug events, 578 (38.0%) were categorized as serious, life-threatening, or fatal; 244 (42.2%) of these more severe events were deemed preventable compared with 177 (18.7%) of the 945 significant adverse drug events. Errors associated with preventable adverse drug events occurred most often at the stages of prescribing (n = 246, 58.4%) and monitoring (n = 256, 60.8%), and errors involving patient adherence (n = 89, 21.1%) also were common. Cardiovascular medications (24.5%), followed by diuretics (22.1%), nonopioid analgesics (15.4%), hypoglycemics (10.9%), and anticoagulants (10.2%) were the most common medication categories associated with preventable adverse drug events. Electrolyte/renal (26.6%), gastrointestinal tract (21.1%), hemorrhagic (15.9%), metabolic/endocrine (13.8%), and neuropsychiatric (8.6%) events were the most common types of preventable adverse drug events. Adverse drug events are common and often preventable among older persons in the ambulatory clinical setting. More serious adverse drug events are more likely to be preventable. Prevention strategies should target the prescribing and monitoring stages of pharmaceutical care. Interventions focused on improving patient adherence with prescribed regimens and monitoring of prescribed medications also may be beneficial.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Dangers of using "optimal" cutpoints in the evaluation of prognostic factors.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Frequency, type and clinical importance of medication history errors at admission to hospital: a systematic review.

              Over a quarter of hospital prescribing errors are attributable to incomplete medication histories being obtained at the time of admission. We undertook a systematic review of studies describing the frequency, type and clinical importance of medication history errors at hospital admission. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL for articles published from 1966 through April 2005 and bibliographies of papers subsequently retrieved from the search. We reviewed all published studies with quantitative results that compared prescription medication histories obtained by physicians at the time of hospital admission with comprehensive medication histories. Three reviewers independently abstracted data on methodologic features and results. We identified 22 studies involving a total of 3755 patients (range 33-1053, median 104). Errors in prescription medication histories occurred in up to 67% of cases: 10%- 61% had at least 1 omission error (deletion of a drug used before admission), and 13%- 22% had at least 1 commission error (addition of a drug not used before admission); 60%- 67% had at least 1 omission or commission error. Only 5 studies (n = 545 patients) explicitly distinguished between unintentional discrepancies and intentional therapeutic changes through discussions with ordering physicians. These studies found that 27%- 54% of patients had at least 1 medication history error and that 19%- 75% of the discrepancies were unintentional. In 6 of the studies (n = 588 patients), the investigators estimated that 11%-59% of the medication history errors were clinically important. Medication history errors at the time of hospital admission are common and potentially clinically important. Improved physician training, accessible community pharmacy databases and closer teamwork between patients, physicians and pharmacists could reduce the frequency of these errors.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Dtsch Med Wochenschr
                Dtsch Med Wochenschr
                10.1055/s-00000011
                Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)
                Georg Thieme Verlag KG (Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany )
                0012-0472
                1439-4413
                October 2020
                06 October 2020
                : 145
                : 21
                : e116-e122
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Apotheke des Universitätsklinikums Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland
                [2 ]Kooperationseinheit Klinische Pharmazie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland
                [3 ]Abteilung Klinische Pharmakologie und Pharmakoepidemiologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland
                Author notes
                Korrespondenzadresse PD Dr. sc. hum. Hanna Seidling Kooperationseinheit Klinische Pharmazie Abteilung Klinische Pharmakologie und Pharmakoepidemiologie Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg Im Neuenheimer Feld 41069120 HeidelbergDeutschland Hanna.Seidling@ 123456med.uni-heidelberg.de
                Article
                10.1055/a-1212-2836
                7575356
                33022741
                The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Categories
                Originalarbeit

                Comments

                Comment on this article