20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of electronic medication reconciliation interventions on medication discrepancies at hospital transitions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      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.

          Abstract

          Background

          Medication reconciliation has been identified as an important intervention to minimize the incidence of unintentional medication discrepancies at transitions in care. However, there is a lack of evidence for the impact of information technology on the rate and incidence of medication discrepancies identified during care transitions. This systematic review was thus, aimed to evaluate the impact of electronic medication reconciliation interventions on the occurrence of medication discrepancies at hospital transitions.

          Methods

          Systematic literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, PubMed, CINHAL, and EMBASE from inception to November, 2015. We included published studies in English that evaluated the effect of information technology on the incidence and rate of medication discrepancies compared with usual care. Cochrane’s tools were used for assessment of the quality of included studies. We performed meta-analyses using random-effects models.

          Results

          Ten studies met our inclusion criteria; of which only one was a randomized controlled trial. Interventions were carried out at various hospital transitions (admission, 5; discharge, 2 and multiple transitions, 3 studies). Meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of 45 % in the proportion of medications with unintentional discrepancies after the use of electronic medication reconciliation (RR 0.55; 95 % CI 0.51 to 0.58). However, there was no significant reduction in either the proportion of patients with medication discrepancies or the mean number of discrepancies per patient. Drug omissions were the most common types of unintended discrepancies, and with an electronic tool a significant but heterogeneously distributed reduction of omission errors over the total number of medications reconciled have been observed (RR 0.20; 95 % CI 0.06 to 0.66). The clinical impact of unintended discrepancies was evaluated in five studies, and there was no potentially fatal error identified and most errors were minor in severity.

          Conclusion

          Medication reconciliation supported by an electronic tool was able to minimize the incidence of medications with unintended discrepancy, mainly drug omissions. But, this did not consistently reduce other process outcomes, although there was a lack of rigorous design to conform these results.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12911-016-0353-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

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

          Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety: a systematic review.

          Iatrogenic injuries related to medications are common, costly, and clinically significant. Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) may reduce medication error rates. We identified trials that evaluated the effects of CPOE and CDSSs on medication safety by electronically searching MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library and by manually searching the bibliographies of retrieved articles. Studies were included for systematic review if the design was a randomized controlled trial, a nonrandomized controlled trial, or an observational study with controls and if the measured outcomes were clinical (eg, adverse drug events) or surrogate (eg, medication errors) markers. Two reviewers extracted all the data. Discussion resolved any disagreements. Five trials assessing CPOE and 7 assessing isolated CDSSs met the criteria. Of the CPOE studies, 2 demonstrated a marked decrease in the serious medication error rate, 1 an improvement in corollary orders, 1 an improvement in 5 prescribing behaviors, and 1 an improvement in nephrotoxic drug dose and frequency. Of the 7 studies evaluating isolated CDSSs, 3 demonstrated statistically significant improvements in antibiotic-associated medication errors or adverse drug events and 1 an improvement in theophylline-associated medication errors. The remaining 3 studies had nonsignificant results. Use of CPOE and isolated CDSSs can substantially reduce medication error rates, but most studies have not been powered to detect differences in adverse drug events and have evaluated a small number of "homegrown" systems. Research is needed to evaluate commercial systems, to compare the various applications, to identify key components of applications, and to identify factors related to successful implementation of these systems.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A reengineered hospital discharge program to decrease rehospitalization: a randomized trial.

            Emergency department visits and rehospitalization are common after hospital discharge. To test the effects of an intervention designed to minimize hospital utilization after discharge. Randomized trial using block randomization of 6 and 8. Randomly arranged index cards were placed in opaque envelopes labeled consecutively with study numbers, and participants were assigned a study group by revealing the index card. General medical service at an urban, academic, safety-net hospital. 749 English-speaking hospitalized adults (mean age, 49.9 years). A nurse discharge advocate worked with patients during their hospital stay to arrange follow-up appointments, confirm medication reconciliation, and conduct patient education with an individualized instruction booklet that was sent to their primary care provider. A clinical pharmacist called patients 2 to 4 days after discharge to reinforce the discharge plan and review medications. Participants and providers were not blinded to treatment assignment. Primary outcomes were emergency department visits and hospitalizations within 30 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes were self-reported preparedness for discharge and frequency of primary care providers' follow-up within 30 days of discharge. Research staff doing follow-up were blinded to study group assignment. Participants in the intervention group (n = 370) had a lower rate of hospital utilization than those receiving usual care (n = 368) (0.314 vs. 0.451 visit per person per month; incidence rate ratio, 0.695 [95% CI, 0.515 to 0.937]; P = 0.009). The intervention was most effective among participants with hospital utilization in the 6 months before index admission (P = 0.014). Adverse events were not assessed; these data were collected but are still being analyzed. This was a single-center study in which not all potentially eligible patients could be enrolled, and outcome assessment sometimes relied on participant report. A package of discharge services reduced hospital utilization within 30 days of discharge. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Unintended medication discrepancies at the time of hospital admission.

              Prior studies suggest that unintended medication discrepancies that represent errors are common at the time of hospital admission. These errors are particularly worthy of attention because they are not likely to be detected by computerized physician order entry systems. We prospectively studied patients reporting the use of at least 4 regular prescription medications who were admitted to general internal medicine clinical teaching units. The primary outcome was unintended discrepancies (errors) between the physicians' admission medication orders and a comprehensive medication history obtained through interview. We also evaluated the potential seriousness of these discrepancies. All discrepancies were reviewed with the medical team to determine if they were intentional or unintentional. All unintended discrepancies were rated for their potential to cause patient harm. After screening 523 admissions, 151 patients were enrolled based on the inclusion criteria. Eighty-one patients (53.6%; 95% confidence interval, 45.7%-61.6%) had at least 1 unintended discrepancy. The most common error (46.4%) was omission of a regularly used medication. Most (61.4%) of the discrepancies were judged to have no potential to cause serious harm. However, 38.6% of the discrepancies had the potential to cause moderate to severe discomfort or clinical deterioration. Medication errors at the time of hospital admission are common, and some have the potential to cause harm. Better methods of ensuring an accurate medication history at the time of hospital admission are needed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                aber5592@uni.sydney.edu.au
                befekadutamrat@gmail.com
                andrew.mclachlan@sydney.edu.au
                jo-anne.brien@sydney.edu.au
                Journal
                BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
                BMC Med Inform Decis Mak
                BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6947
                22 August 2016
                22 August 2016
                2016
                : 16
                : 1
                : 112
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
                [2 ]School of Pharmacy, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia
                [3 ]Centre for Education and Research on Ageing, Concord Hospital, Sydney, Australia
                [4 ]St Vincent’s Hospital Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
                Article
                353
                10.1186/s12911-016-0353-9
                4994239
                27549581
                c8dc9860-9c8d-4370-b1b9-1edfa7c6363a
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 17 March 2016
                : 18 August 2016
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Bioinformatics & Computational biology
                electronic medication reconciliation,medication history,medication safety,medication errors,medication discrepancies,care transition

                Comments

                Comment on this article