Medication Safety In Primary Care Research Articles

Towards understanding and improving medication safety for patients with mental illness in primary care: A multimethod study.

Medication safety incidents have been identified as an important target to improve patient safety in mental healthcare. Despite this, the causes of preventable medication safety incidents affecting patients with mental illness have historically been poorly understood, with research now addressing this knowledge gap through a healthcare professional lens. However, patients and carers can also provide complimentary insight into safety issues, and as key stakeholders in healthcare, it is vital to consider their needs when designing effective interventions. A two-stage approach was adopted by (i) conducting three focus groups (FG) comprising 13 patients with mental illness and their carers to develop a holistic picture of medication safety in primary care with extraction of themes guided by the P-MEDS framework; (ii) conducting two separate nominal group consensus workshops with seven patients with mental illness/carers and seven healthcare professionals to identify priority areas for targeted interventions. Seven themes were identified in the FGs: communication; trust, involvement and respect; continuity and support; access; the healthcare professional; the patient and carer;and the organisation. Priority areas identified for intervention by key stakeholders included improving communication within and between clinical services, enhancing patient support with holistic continuity of care, maximising shared decision-making and empowerment, ensuring timely access to medicines and services, strengthening healthcare professional knowledge regarding mental illnesses and associated medications,and increasing patient dignity and respect. This study has developed a holistic picture of contributors to medication safety incidents affecting patients with mental illness in primary care. This theory was then used by key stakeholders to inform and generate priority recommendations for targeted interventions. These findings can be used to inform future intervention research, as they consider the needs of those who access or work within primary care services. An advisory group consisting of three expert patients with lived experience of mental illness was consulted on the design of both stages of this study. Patients with mental illness and/or their carers were recruited and participated in both stages of this study. Patients/carers aided with data analysis and interpretation during the patient/carer nominal group consensus workshop.

Using sociotechnical theory to understand medication safety work in primary care and prescribers’ use of clinical decision support: a qualitative study

ObjectivesThe concept of safety work draws attention to the intentional work of ensuring safety within care systems. Clinical decision support (CDS) has been designed to enhance medication safety in primary...

Which Adverse Events and Which Drugs Are Implicated in Drug-Related Hospital Admissions? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Adverse drug events (ADEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are leading causes of iatrogenic injury, which can result in emergency department (ED) visits or admissions to inpatient wards. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide up-to-date estimates of the prevalence of (preventable) drug-related ED visits and hospital admissions, as well as the type and prevalence of implicated ADRs/ADEs and drugs. A literature search of studies published between January 2012 and December 2021 was performed in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Retrospective and prospective observational studies investigating acute admissions to EDs or inpatient wards due to ADRs or ADEs in the general population were included. Meta-analyses of prevalence rates were conducted using generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) with the random-effect method. Seventeen studies reporting ADRs and/or ADEs were eligible for inclusion. The prevalence rates of ADR- and ADE-related admissions to EDs or inpatient wards were estimated at 8.3% ([95% CI, 6.4-10.7%]) and 13.9% ([95% CI, 8.1-22.8%]), respectively, of which almost half (ADRs: 44.7% [95% CI: 28.1; 62.4]) and more than two thirds (ADEs: 71.0% [95% CI, 65.9-75.6%]) had been classified as at least possibly preventable. The ADR categories most frequently implicated in ADR-related admissions were gastrointestinal disorders, electrolyte disturbances, bleeding events, and renal and urinary disorders. Nervous system drugs were found to be the most commonly implicated drug groups, followed by cardiovascular and antithrombotic agents. Our findings demonstrate that ADR-related admissions to EDs and inpatient wards still represent a major and often preventable health care problem. In comparison to previous systematic reviews, cardiovascular and antithrombotic drugs remain common causes of drug-related admissions, while nervous system drugs appear to have become more commonly implicated. These developments may be considered in future efforts to improve medication safety in primary care.

Medication safety incidents associated with the remote delivery of primary care: a rapid review.

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered rapid, fundamental changes, notably increased remote delivery of primary care. While the impact of these changes on medication safety is not yet fully understood, research conducted before the pandemic may provide evidence for possible consequences. To examine the published literature on medication safety incidents associated with the remote delivery of primary care, with a focus on telemedicine and electronic prescribing. A rapid review was conducted according to the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group guidance. An electronic search was carried out on Embase and Medline (via PubMed) using key search terms 'medication error', 'electronic prescribing', 'telemedicine' and 'primary care'. Identified studies were synthesised narratively; reported medication safety incidents were categorised according to the WHO Conceptual Framework for the International Classification for Patient Safety. Fifteen studies were deemed eligible for inclusion. All 15 studies reported medication incidents associated with electronic prescribing; no studies were identified that reported medication safety incidents associated with telemedicine. The most commonly reported medication safety incidents were 'wrong label/instruction' and 'wrong dose/strength/frequency'. The frequency of medication safety incidents ranged from 0.89 to 81.98 incidents per 100 electronic prescriptions analysed. This review of medication safety incidents associated with the remote delivery of primary care identified common incident types associated with electronic prescriptions. There was a wide variation in reported frequencies of medication safety incidents associated with electronic prescriptions. Further research is required to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medication safety in primary care, particularly the increased use of telemedicine.

Understanding factors influencing uptake and sustainable use of the PINCER intervention at scale: A qualitative evaluation using Normalisation Process Theory

IntroductionMedication errors are an important cause of morbidity and mortality. The pharmacist-led IT-based intervention to reduce clinically important medication errors (PINCER) has demonstrated improvements in primary care medication safety, and whilst now the subject of national roll-out its optimal and sustainable use across health contexts has not been fully explored. As part of a qualitative evaluation we aimed to identify factors influencing successful adoption, embedding and sustainable use of PINCER across primary care settings in England, UK.MethodsSemi-structured face-to-face or telephone interviews, including follow-up interviews and an online survey were conducted with professionals knowledgeable of PINCER. Interview recruitment targeted four early adopter regions; the survey was distributed nationally. Initial data analysis was inductive, followed by analysis using a coding framework. A deductive matrix approach was taken to map the framework to the Normalisation Process Theory (NPT). Themes were then identified.ResultsFifty participants were interviewed, 18 participated in a follow-up interview. Eighty-one general practices and three Clinical Commissioning Groups completed the survey. Four themes were identified and interpreted within the relevant NPT construct: Awareness & Perceptions (Coherence), Receptivity to PINCER (Cognitive Participation), Engagement [Collective Action] and Reflections & Adaptations (Reflexive Monitoring). Variability was identified in how PINCER awareness was raised and how staff worked to operationalise the intervention. Facilitators for use included stakeholder investment, favourable evidence, inclusion in policy, incentives, fit with individual and organisational goals and positive experiences. Barriers included lack of understanding, capacity concerns, operational difficulties and the impact of COVID-19. System changes such as adding alerts on clinical systems were indicative of embedding and continued use.ConclusionsThe NPT helped understand motives behind engagement and the barriers and facilitators towards sustainable use. Optimising troubleshooting support and encouraging establishments to adopt an inclusive approach to intervention adoption and utilisation could help accelerate uptake and help establish ongoing sustainable use.

Changes to primary care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic and perceived impact on medication safety: A survey study

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the delivery of primary care around the world. In Ireland, the use of technologies such as virtual consultations and the electronic transfer of prescriptions became widespread in order to deliver care to patients while minimising infection risk. The impact of these changes on medication safety is not yet known. ObjectivesThe aims of this survey study were to investigate 1) the changes that have occurred in Irish primary care since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and 2) the impact of these changes on medication safety. MethodsAnonymous, online surveys were distributed to general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists from August–September 2021. Surveys contained quantitative (multiple-choice, Likert scale) and qualitative (free-text) questions concerning workflow changes, medication safety incidents and near misses, and GP/pharmacist perspectives on medication safety and COVID-19. Reported medication safety incidents and near misses were categorised according to the WHO Conceptual Framework for the International Classification for Patient Safety. ResultsIn total, there were 251 responses to the survey, comprising of 211 pharmacists and 40 GPs. The most significant workflow changes during the pandemic were the widespread use of a secure clinical email service (Healthmail) that facilitates electronic prescription transfer and communication (75.3% of respondents) and the increased use of telephone consultations (49%). Overall, Healthmail was widely perceived to have had a positive impact on medication safety. Most GPs did not perceive a change in the frequency of medication safety incidents during the pandemic, while most pharmacists reported a slight increase in incidents. Survey participants highlighted pressure, patient expectations, and patient monitoring as significant challenges encountered during the pandemic. ConclusionsDuring the pandemic, a number of significant changes occurred in primary care in Ireland, particularly involving communication of healthcare information, with varying impacts on workflow and medication safety. Future research should focus on the optimisation of electronic prescribing and telemedicine services in Ireland, patient perspectives on the changes in primary care, and interventions to improve medication safety in primary care.

Ambulatory Medication Safety in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.

To review the literature on medication safety in primary care in the electronic health record era. Included studies measured rates and outcomes of medication safety in patients whose prescriptions were written in primary care clinics with electronic prescribing. Four investigators independently reviewed titles and analyzed abstracts with dual-reviewer review for eligibility, characteristics, and risk of bias. Of 1464 articles identified, 56 met the inclusion criteria. Forty-three studies were noninterventional and 13 included an intervention. The majority of the studies (30) used their own definition of error. The most common outcomes were potentially inappropriate prescribing/medications (PIPs), adverse drug events (ADEs), and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). Most of the studies only included high-risk subpopulations (39), usually older adults taking > 4 medications. The rate of PIPs varied widely (0.19% to 98.2%). The rate of ADEs was lower (0.47% to 14.7%). There was poor correlation of PIP and PPO with documented ADEs leading to physical harm. This literature is limited by its inconsistent and highly variable outcomes. The majority of medication safety studies in primary care were in high-risk populations and measured potential harms rather than actual harms. Applying algorithms to primary care medication lists significantly overestimates rate of actual harms.

Evaluation of a pharmacist-led actionable audit and feedback intervention for improving medication safety in UK primary care: An interrupted time series analysis.

We evaluated the impact of the pharmacist-led Safety Medication dASHboard (SMASH) intervention on medication safety in primary care. SMASH comprised (1) training of clinical pharmacists to deliver the intervention; (2) a web-based dashboard providing actionable, patient-level feedback; and (3) pharmacists reviewing individual at-risk patients, and initiating remedial actions or advising general practitioners on doing so. It was implemented in 43 general practices covering a population of 235,595 people in Salford (Greater Manchester), UK. All practices started receiving the intervention between 18 April 2016 and 26 September 2017. We used an interrupted time series analysis of rates (prevalence) of potentially hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring, comparing observed rates post-intervention to extrapolations from a 24-month pre-intervention trend. The number of people registered to participating practices and having 1 or more risk factors for being exposed to hazardous prescribing or inadequate blood-test monitoring at the start of the intervention was 47,413 (males: 23,073 [48.7%]; mean age: 60 years [standard deviation: 21]). At baseline, 95% of practices had rates of potentially hazardous prescribing (composite of 10 indicators) between 0.88% and 6.19%. The prevalence of potentially hazardous prescribing reduced by 27.9% (95% CI 20.3% to 36.8%, p < 0.001) at 24 weeks and by 40.7% (95% CI 29.1% to 54.2%, p < 0.001) at 12 months after introduction of SMASH. The rate of inadequate blood-test monitoring (composite of 2 indicators) reduced by 22.0% (95% CI 0.2% to 50.7%, p = 0.046) at 24 weeks; the change at 12 months (23.5%) was no longer significant (95% CI -4.5% to 61.6%, p = 0.127). After 12 months, 95% of practices had rates of potentially hazardous prescribing between 0.74% and 3.02%. Study limitations include the fact that practices were not randomised, and therefore unmeasured confounding may have influenced our findings. The SMASH intervention was associated with reduced rates of potentially hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring in general practices. This reduction was sustained over 12 months after the start of the intervention for prescribing but not for monitoring of medication. There was a marked reduction in the variation in rates of hazardous prescribing between practices.

Professional, structural and organisational interventions in primary care for reducing medication errors.

British Journal of Community NursingVol. 24, No. 2 Cochrane Review SummaryProfessional, structural and organisational interventions in primary care for reducing medication errorsKate Rowan-RobinsonKate Rowan-RobinsonE-mail Address: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorKate Rowan-RobinsonPublished Online:30 Jan 2019https://doi.org/10.12968/bjcn.2019.24.2.77AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail View article References Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Healthcare. Patient safety in primary healthcare: a review of the literature. 2009. https://tinyurl.com/y7cdv37o (accessed 12 November 2018) Google ScholarKhalil H, Bell B, Chambers H et al.. Professional, structural and organisational interventions in primary care for reducing medication errors. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017; 10:CD003942. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003942.pub3 Medline, Google ScholarOlaniyan JO, Ghaleb M, Dhillon S et al.. Safety of medication use in primary care. Int J Pharm Pract. 2015; 23:3–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijpp.12120 Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarStewart AL, Lynch KJ. Medication discrepancies despite pharmacist led medication reconciliation: the challenges of maintaining an accurate medication list in primary care. Pharm Pract. 2014; 12(1):360 Medline, Google ScholarTudor Car L, Papachristou N, Gallagher J et al.. (2016). Identification of priorities for improvement of medication safety in primary care: a PRIORITIZE study. BMC Fam Pract. 2016; 17(1):160. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0552-6 Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarWorld Health Organization. Medication errors: technical series on safer primary care. 2016. https://tinyurl.com/y8s98gcg (accessed 12 November 2018) Google Scholar FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails 2 February 2019Volume 24Issue 2ISSN (print): 1462-4753ISSN (online): 2052-2215 Metrics History Accepted 1 January 2019 Published online 30 January 2019 Published in print 2 February 2019 Information© MA Healthcare LimitedPDF download

Developing a learning health system: Insights from a qualitative process evaluation of a pharmacist-led electronic audit and feedback intervention to improve medication safety in primary care.

IntroductionDevelopments in information technology offer opportunities to enhance medication safety in primary care. We evaluated the implementation and adoption of a complex pharmacist-led intervention involving the use of an electronic audit and feedback surveillance dashboard to identify patients potentially at risk of hazardous prescribing or monitoring of medicines in general practices. The intervention aimed to create a rapid learning health system for medication safety in primary care. This study aimed to explore how the intervention was implemented, adopted and embedded into practice using a qualitative process evaluation.MethodsTwenty two participants were purposively recruited from eighteen out of forty-three general practices receiving the intervention as well as clinical commissioning group staff across Salford UK, which reflected the range of contexts in which the intervention was implemented. Interviews explored how pharmacists and GP staff implemented the intervention and how this affected care practice. Data analysis was thematic with emerging themes developed into coding frameworks based on Normalisation Process Theory (NPT).ResultsEngagement with the dashboard involved a process of sense-making in which pharmacists considered it added value to their work. The intervention helped to build respect, improve trust and develop relationships between pharmacists and GPs. Collaboration and communication between pharmacists and clinicians was primarily initiated by pharmacists and was important for establishing the intervention. The intervention operated as a rapid learning health system as it allowed for the evidence in the dashboard to be translated into changes in work practices and into transformations in care.ConclusionsOur study highlighted the importance of the combined use of information technology and the role of pharmacists working in general practice settings. Medicine optimisation activities in primary care may be enhanced by the implementation of a pharmacist-led electronic audit and feedback system. This intervention established a rapid learning health system that swiftly translated data from electronic health records into changes in practice to improve patient care. Using NPT provided valuable insights into the ways in which developing relationships, collaborations and communication between health professionals could lead to the implementation, adoption and sustainability of the intervention.

Primary care workflow process mapping of medication-related activities performed by non-provider staff: A pilot project's approach.

A workflow process mapping approach was previously developed to understand the impact of primary care medication use processes on medication safety. The workflow process mapping approach was applied to a pilot project in one primary care practice. The objective of this article is to: (1) exemplify how workflow process mapping was implemented in one primary care practice to characterize medication safety issues (i.e., critical workflow gaps/deviations), (2) discuss the identified critical medication safety workflow gaps and deviations, and (3) summarize the pragmatic, practice-level recommendations developed to enhance practice-level medication safety. Four medication-related activities were directly observed, including: (1) medication reconciliation, (2) warfarin medication management, (3) vaccination administration, and (4) medication renewal requests. Observations occurred with registered nurses, medical assistants, and telephone operators. An ideal-state and observed workflow process map was created for each medication-related activity and was compared to identify critical medication safety workflow gaps and deviations. Practice-level recommendations were developed to enhance workflow and medication safety across all medication-related activities. 111 medication-related observations were recorded over 6-weeks across all 4 workflows (100 observation hours). A total of 17 critical workflow safety gaps, 9 critical workflow step deviations, and 9 workflow sequence deviations were identified. Seventy-six percent of total workflow gaps resulted from inappropriate medication verification. Most workflow step deviations (33%) were due to inappropriate documentation, whereas most sequence deviations (44%) stemmed from inadequate medication verification. Practice-level recommendations to enhance warfarin medication safety were prioritized and implemented prior to the completion of the pilot project. The results of this workflow mapping pilot project exemplify the need to enhance primary care medication safety for workflows conducted by non-provider staff members in primary care practices. Additionally, this approach can be used to identify opportunities for primary care pharmacist integration, particularly for practices with little or no prior pharmacist involvement.

A shared medication scheme for community dwelling older patients with polypharmacy receiving home health care: role of the community pharmacist

ABSTRACTBackground and objective: An accurate medication scheme may be a useful tool to improve medication safety in primary care. This study aimed to identify (1) pharmacists’ alterations to nurse medication schemes and (2) potential improvements to the contribution of the community pharmacist to a shared medication scheme within a multidisciplinary collaboration. Dosing frequency, potentially incorrect moments of intake, drug–drug interactions and medication complexity (quantified by the Medication Regimen Complexity Index, MRCI) were investigated.Setting and method: Observational study in community dwelling older patients (≥70 years) with polypharmacy receiving home health care (i.e. medications being prepared and/or administered by home care nurses). Home care nurses provided the community pharmacist with the original medication scheme (‘nurse medication scheme’), subsequently the community pharmacist generated a standardized ‘pharmacist medication scheme’ which was uploaded on an electronic health platform (Vitalink). The researcher recorded all pharmacists’ alterations and looked for possible additional improvements (‘researcher medication scheme’).Results: Pharmacists made 482 alterations to the nurse medication schemes of 31 patients. Most important alterations included adding indication (61%), generic or brand name (18%) and moment of intake (9%). Pharmacists did not reduce dosing frequency. MRCI scores (median [IQR]) significantly differed between pharmacist (38 [15]) and nurse medication schemes (32 [11]) (p < 0.001) and between nurse (32 [11]) and researcher medication schemes (40 [15]) (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Alterations made by the community pharmacists enable more complete and accurate medication schemes; however, there is room for improvement in optimizing the patient’s medication scheme in a multidisciplinary collaboration.

SMASH! The Salford medication safety dashboard

BackgroundPatient safety is vital to well-functioning health systems. A key component is safe prescribing, particularly in primary care where most medications are prescribed. Previous research has demonstrated that the number...

Workflow process mapping to characterize office-based primary care medication use and safety: A conceptual approach.

We developed the PCMedSafety conceptual framework to illustrate primary care medication safety transformation opportunities. PCMedSafety demonstrates the interrelationship between the practice-level primary care delivery system, medication workflow processes for common medication-related activities, and medication use and safety outcomes. This framework was used to conceptualize a workflow process mapping approach to characterize and evaluate the safety of medication-related activities performed in primary care practices. In this article, we conceptually describe how workflow process mapping of primary care medication-related activities can be used to: (1) understand and characterize common office-based primary care medication-related workflows, and (2) identify medication-related workflow process gaps and deviations and their impact on medication use and safety within office-based primary care. Workflow process mapping of primary care medication-related activities consists of 9 major steps, including: (1) identification of a primary care practice, (2) establishment of a workflow mapping team, (3) selection of medication-related activities, (4) development of ideal-state workflow process map(s), (5) selection of data elements and development of data collection form(s), (6) development of a workflow observation schedule, (7) completion of direct workflow observations, (8) development of observed workflow process map(s), and (9) data analysis to identify medication safety workflow gaps and deviations. The medication workflow process mapping approach illustrated in this article can be used by primary care executive leadership, clinician leaders, primary care providers, and clinical pharmacists to identify, resolve, and prevent medication safety concerns within a primary care practices. Workflow gaps and deviations identified through workflow process mapping can be used to inform practice-specific opportunities for: (1) team-based primary care redesign to integrate clinical pharmacists into the expanded primary care team; (2) workforce development, including staff/provider training and role delegation for common primary care medication-related activities; and (3) improvements in workflow efficiency and consistency to reduce preventable medication errors.

Medication safety challenges in primary care: Nurses' perspective.

To identify the issues surrounding medication error reporting in community nursing and improvement strategies related to medication safety. Medication-related problems have been identified from various sources in the literature. Examples of these include incident reporting by healthcare professionals, medico-legal and patient complaints and systematic identification of organisational structure. Only a few studies report on the clinicians' perceptions of medication safety in community nursing and the challenges they face within their workplace to implement medication safety initiatives. Qualitative design, using conversation-style interviews with experienced registered nurses in primary care roles. Using a general iterative approach of semantic analysis, our qualitative research study was guided by an essentialist paradigm. Our method for understanding included semi-structured in-depth interviews with 10 clinicians from a large community care organisation in rural Victoria in Australia. We developed an interview guide, which included open-ended questions on clinicians' experiences, perceived barriers and facilitators, and strategies to improve medication safety. Several barriers have been identified by healthcare practitioners that hinder medication safety in primary care including culture differences between community and hospital setting, politics within the healthcare system, lack of clarity around the nurses' roles and lack of error reporting. Other sources of errors cited by the participants were the lack of clarity or awareness of the processes and procedures of medication incidents reporting for staff within the organisation experience. Lack of education regarding medication safety, the dilemmas associated with reporting and documentation are also significant barriers.

Mindful organizing in patients' contributions to primary care medication safety.

BackgroundThere is a need to ensure that the risks associated with medication usage in primary health care are controlled. To maintain an understanding of the risks, health‐care organizations may engage in a process known as “mindful organizing.” While this is typically conceived of as involving organizational members, it may in the health‐care context also include patients. Our study aimed to examine ways in which patients might contribute to mindful organizing with respect to primary care medication safety.MethodQualitative focus groups and interviews were carried out with 126 members of the public in North West England and the East Midlands. Participants were taking medicines for a long‐term health condition, were taking several medicines, had previously encountered problems with their medication or were caring for another person in any of these categories. Participants described their experiences of dealing with medication‐related concerns. The transcripts were analysed using a thematic method.ResultsWe identified 4 themes to explain patient behaviour associated with mindful organizing: knowledge about clinical or system issues; artefacts that facilitate control of medication risks; communication with health‐care professionals; and the relationship between patients and the health‐care system (in particular, mutual trust).ConclusionsMindful organizing is potentially useful for framing patient involvement in safety, although there are some conceptual and practical issues to be addressed before it can be fully exploited in this setting. We have identified factors that influence (and are strengthened by) patients’ engagement in mindful organizing, and as such would be a useful focus of efforts to support patient involvement.

Understanding the implementation and adoption of a technological intervention to improve medication safety in primary care: a realist evaluation

BackgroundMonitoring for potentially hazardous prescribing is increasingly important to improve medication safety. Healthcare information technology can be used to achieve this aim, for example by providing access to prescribing data through surveillance of patients’ electronic health records. The aim of our study was to examine the implementation and adoption of an electronic medicines optimisation system that was intended to facilitate clinical audit in primary care by identifying patients at risk of an adverse drug event. We adopted a sociotechnical approach that focuses on how complex social, organisational and institutional factors may impact upon the use of technology within work settings.MethodsWe undertook a qualitative realist evaluation of the use of an electronic medicines optimisation system in one Clinical Commissioning Group in England. Five semi-structured interviews, four focus groups and one observation were conducted with a range of stakeholders. Consistent with a realist evaluation methodology, the analysis focused on exploring the links between context, mechanism and outcome to explain the ways the intervention might work, for whom and in what circumstances.ResultsUsing the electronic medicines optimisation system could lead to a number of improved patient safety outcomes including pre-emptively reviewing patients at risk of adverse drug events. The effective use of the system depended upon engagement with the system, the flow of information between different health professionals centrally placed at the Clinical Commissioning Group and those locally placed at individual general practices, and upon variably adapting work practices to facilitate the use of the system. The use of the system was undermined by perceptions of ownership, lack of access, and lack of knowledge and awareness.ConclusionsThe use of an electronic medicines optimisation system may improve medication safety in primary care settings by identifying those patients at risk of an adverse drug event. To fully realise the potential benefits for medication safety there needs to be better utilisation across primary care and with a wider range of stakeholders. Engaging with all potential stakeholders and users prior to implementation of such systems might allay perceptions that the system is owned centrally and increase knowledge of the potential benefits.

Identification of priorities for improvement of medication safety in primary care: a PRIORITIZE study.

BackgroundMedication error is a frequent, harmful and costly patient safety incident. Research to date has mostly focused on medication errors in hospitals. In this study, we aimed to identify the main causes of, and solutions to, medication error in primary care.MethodsWe used a novel priority-setting method for identifying and ranking patient safety problems and solutions called PRIORITIZE. We invited 500 North West London primary care clinicians to complete an open-ended questionnaire to identify three main problems and solutions relating to medication error in primary care. 113 clinicians submitted responses, which we thematically synthesized into a composite list of 48 distinct problems and 45 solutions. A group of 57 clinicians randomly selected from the initial cohort scored these and an overall ranking was derived. The agreement between the clinicians’ scores was presented using the average expert agreement (AEA). The study was conducted between September 2013 and November 2014.ResultsThe top three problems were incomplete reconciliation of medication during patient ‘hand-overs’, inadequate patient education about their medication use and poor discharge summaries. The highest ranked solutions included development of a standardized discharge summary template, reduction of unnecessary prescribing, and minimisation of polypharmacy. Overall, better communication between the healthcare provider and patient, quality assurance approaches during medication prescribing and monitoring, and patient education on how to use their medication were considered the top priorities. The highest ranked suggestions received the strongest agreement among the clinicians, i.e. the highest AEA score.ConclusionsClinicians identified a range of suggestions for better medication management, quality assurance procedures and patient education. According to clinicians, medication errors can be largely prevented with feasible and affordable interventions. PRIORITIZE is a new, convenient, systematic, and replicable method, and merits further exploration with a view to becoming a part of a routine preventative patient safety monitoring mechanism.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0552-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Improving medication safety in primary care. A review and consensus procedure by the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care

ABSTRACTBackground: Drug treatment is an important clinical process in primary care that is associated with risk of error and adverse events.Objective: To review currently available research evidence on the topic and to develop a framework, which can help to guide improvement of medication safety.Methods: Systematic reviews were performed on adverse drug events (ADE), their preventability, and on available tools and methods to improve medication safety with a particular focus on information technology. Consensus methods were used to develop a framework to guide the improvement of medication safety based on the findings of our literature review.Results: The median prevalence rate of ADEs in primary care patients was 12.8%. Only a median of 16.5% of ADEs were preventable and thus could be classified as medication errors. Our review of information technology interventions found that only about half of the studies found a reduction of medication errors. In both reviews, the wide range between studies emphasizes the necessity of a validated medication error classification system. Another important aspect of medication safety appears to be a general lack of safety culture in primary care, which led us to the development of the Salzburg medication safety framework (SaMSaF), based on the MaPSaF tool to improve patient safety. The tool proved to be feasible and useful in a pilot study with several GP practices.Conclusion: A number of tools and interventions to investigate and enhance medication safety have been identified. Further research is necessary to implement and evaluate current concepts.

Primary Care Medication Safety Surveillance with Integrated Primary and Secondary Care Electronic Health Records: A Cross-Sectional Study.

IntroductionThe extent of preventable medication-related hospital admissions and medication-related issues in primary care is significant enough to justify developing decision support systems for medication safety surveillance. The prerequisite for such systems is defining a relevant set of medication safety-related indicators and understanding the influence of both patient and general practice characteristics on medication prescribing and monitoring.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to investigate the feasibility of linked primary and secondary care electronic health record data for surveillance of medication safety, examining not only prescribing but also monitoring, and associations with patient- and general practice-level characteristics.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using linked records of patients served by one hospital and over 50 general practices in Salford, UK. Statistical analysis consisted of mixed-effects logistic models, relating prescribing safety indicators to potential determinants.ResultsThe overall prevalence (proportion of patients with at least one medication safety hazard) was 5.45 % for prescribing indicators and 7.65 % for monitoring indicators. Older patients and those on multiple medications were at higher risk of prescribing hazards, but at lower risk of missed monitoring. The odds of missed monitoring among all patients were 25 % less for males, 50 % less for patients in practices that provide general practitioner training, and threefold higher in practices serving the most deprived compared with the least deprived areas. Practices with more prescribing hazards did not tend to show more monitoring issues.ConclusionsSystematic collection, collation, and analysis of linked primary and secondary care records produce plausible and useful information about medication safety for a health system. Medication safety surveillance systems should pay close attention to patient age and polypharmacy with respect to both prescribing and monitoring failures; treat prescribing and monitoring as different statistical processes, rather than a combined measure of prescribing safety; and audit the socio-economic equity of missed monitoring.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-015-0304-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.