Medication-use Process Research Articles

Bridging the continuity: Practice-enhancing publications about the ambulatory care medication-use process in 2022.

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. This article identifies, summarizes, and prioritizes literature on the ambulatory care medication-use process (ACMUP) published in 2022 that can describe ambulatory pharmacy practice. The medication-use process (MUP) is the foundational system that provides the framework for safe medication utilization within the healthcare environment and was reimagined to focus on new innovations and advancements in ambulatory pharmacy practice. The ACMUP is defined in this article as having the following components: transitions of care, prescribing, access, dispensing, adherence, and evaluating. Articles evaluating at least one step of the ACMUP were assessed for their usefulness toward practice improvement. A PubMed search for articles published in 2022 was conducted in January 2023 using targeted Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) keywords and the table of contents of selected pharmacy journals, providing a total of 4,125 articles. A thorough review identified 49 potentially practice-enhancing articles: 6 for transitions of care, 9 for prescribing, 5 for access, 2 for dispensing, 6 for adherence, and 21 articles for evaluating. Trends from the impact articles are described. It is important to routinely review the published literature and to incorporate significant findings into daily practice. This article continues a series of articles defining and evaluating the currently published literature around the ACMUP. As healthcare continues to advance and care shifts to ambulatory settings, the ACMUP will continue to be a crucial process to evaluate.

Medication Errors in Psychiatric Hospitals: A Nationwide Real-World Evidence Study in Saudi Arabia

Background: Medication errors are among the most prevalent medical errors and result in significant morbidity and mortality. They pose a major threat to patient safety in psychiatric hospitals. However, the lack of a comprehensive investigation into the root causes of these errors restricts the development of effective corrective measures. Objective: This study aimed to characterize the types of errors, determine the stages of the medication use process, and identify factors associated with errors occurring among government psychiatric hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted from August 2019 to June 2020. All medication error reports submitted to the Ministry of Health General Administration of Pharmaceutical Care database from 18 government psychiatric hospitals in Saudi Arabia were assessed. The database is de-identified and contains information on all medication errors, including patient demographics, medication information, error information, causes of errors, and reporter information. Medication use was categorized as ordering/prescribing, transcribing, dispensing, administration, and monitoring. The present findings represent a descriptive analysis of the data using Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) version 9.4. Result: A total of 23,355 medication error reports were reported to the database during the study period. Among Saudi Arabian cities, Riyadh (n = 8972, 38.4%) had the highest medication error reporting rate, followed by Taif (n = 3705, 15.9%) and Jeddah (n = 2621, 11.2%). Most reported errors were frequently made by physicians (n = 20,284, 86.9%) and were primarily detected by pharmacists (n = 20,974, 89.8%). Approximately half of them (n = 13,150, 56.3%) were classified as “Category B” that occurred, but they did not reach patients. Most medication errors were reported in adults (n = 22,589, 96.7%) and male patients (n = 16,393, 70.2%). Most error reports were detected at the prescription stage (n = 16,481; 70.6%) during the medication-use process. Work overload of the staff (n = 2911, 12.8%) and drug labeling, packaging, and nomenclature (n = 2826, 12.1%) were the most common contributing factors associated with the reported errors. Olanzapine (n = 1650, 7.1%), omeprazole (n = 1350, 5.8%), and quetiapine (n = 1273, 5.5%) were the most common medications associated with medication errors. Conclusions: Preventable medication errors are typical in psychiatric hospitals and may result in severe consequences. Increased efforts are needed to control and minimize prescribing errors and improve reporting in Saudi Arabia.

Collaborative pharmacy research across integrated health systems: A purpose and promise for opportunities to study the complete medication-use process.

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

Practice-enhancing publications about the medication-use process in 2023.

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. This article identifies, prioritizes, and summarizes published literature on the medication-use process (MUP) from calendar year 2023 that can impact health-system pharmacy daily practice. The MUP is the foundational system that provides the framework for safe medication utilization within the healthcare environment. The MUP is defined in this article as having the following components: prescribing/transcribing, dispensing, administration, and monitoring. Articles evaluating at least one step of the MUP were assessed for their usefulness toward practice improvement. A PubMed search was conducted in January 2024 for calendar year 2023 using targeted Medical Subject Headings keywords and the tables of contents of selected pharmacy journals were searched, providing a total of 5,314 articles. A thorough review identified 40 potentially practice-enhancing articles: 8 for prescribing/transcribing, 15 for dispensing, 6 for administration, and 11 for monitoring. The trends from the articles are briefly summarized, with a mention of the importance within health-system pharmacy. The articles are listed and summarized in tables for further review and evaluation. It is important to routinely review the published literature and to incorporate significant findings into daily practice. This article assists in identifying and summarizing the most impactful literature from 2023. Health-system pharmacists have an active role in improving the MUP in their institutions, and awareness of significant published studies can assist in changing practice at the institutional level.

Development of a Medication-Use Evaluation Template for Andexanet Alfa in the Reversal of Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Inhibitors.

Medication-use evaluations are meant to ensure that medication-use processes are consistent with prevailing standards of care, assure optimal use of therapy, and reduce the risk of medication-related problems. Reversal agents for direct oral anticoagulants are a worthy focus for medication-use evaluations for reasons of efficacy, safety, and cost. A multidisciplinary team of experts developed 2 medication-use evaluation templates illustrating the application of professional society guidelines to the appropriate use of andexanet alfa.

Pharmacist roles in the medication use Process: Qualitative analysis of stakeholder perceptions

BackgroundPharmacist roles in the Medication Use Process (MUP) have advanced along with new healthcare delivery models and interprofessional collaborative practice. It is unclear whether stakeholder perceptions of pharmacist roles have evolved simultaneously. ObjectivesExamine patient, pharmacist, and physician perceptions of pharmacist roles in the MUP. MethodsThis institutional review board-approved study used a cross-sectional design with Qualtrics panels of patients, pharmacists, and physicians. Role Theory was used as a framework to develop 12-item surveys to study pharmacist role perceptions in the MUP: prescribing, transcribing, dispensing, administration, and monitoring. Content analysis was performed on the responses to open-ended questions. ResultsFrom 1004 patients, a total of 7217 comments were obtained on 9 questions (740-1004 comments), resulting in an average of 802 comments per question or 0.8 comments per question per respondent (CQR). Similarly, 1620 comments from 205 pharmacists on 11 questions (121-205 comments) averaged 0.72 CQR; and 1561 comments from 200 physicians on 11 questions (136-200 comments) equated to 0.74 CQR. Content analysis revealed recurring themes across the stakeholders: “pharmacists,” “physicians,” “insurance,” “technology,” “collaboration,” “time,” “communication,” and “patient’s responsibility.” Some role congruence was seen regarding pharmacist roles by all 3 stakeholders; noting pharmacist roles in improving all steps of the MUP, except transcribing. Pharmacists highlighted professional challenges such as staffing issues, burnout, and competing demands; which were not acknowledged by patients and physicians indicating the need to increase awareness. ConclusionThis study showed increased visibility and awareness of pharmacist roles in the MUP by all stakeholders, compared to previous research showing pharmacist roles limited to dispensing. Known barriers to pharmacy practice such as lack of provider status and reimbursement were not reported by any of the stakeholders in this study. There is a need to continuously inform stakeholders about pharmacists’ expanding roles in the MUP through advocacy and marketing.

Assessment of Effectiveness of 2 Medication-Use Process Quality Audit Tools Using Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory.

Assessment of Effectiveness of 2 Medication-Use Process Quality Audit Tools Using Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory.

Practice-enhancing publications about the medication-use process in 2021.

This article identifies, prioritizes, and summarizes published literature on the medication-use process (MUP) from calendar year 2021 that can impact health-system pharmacy daily practice. The MUP is the foundational system that provides the framework for safe medication utilization within the healthcare environment. The MUP is defined in this article as having the following components: prescribing/transcribing, dispensing, administration, and monitoring, and monitoring/medication reconciliation. Articles evaluating at least one step of the MUP were assessed for their usefulness toward practice improvement. A PubMed search was conducted in January 2022 for articles published in calendar year 2021 using targeted Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) keywords, and searches of the table of contents of selected pharmacy journals were conducted, providing a total of 7,178 articles. A thorough review identified 79 potentially practice-enhancing articles: 15 for prescribing/transcribing, 17 for dispensing, 4 for administration, 21 for monitoring, and 22 for monitoring/medication reconciliation. Ranking of the articles for importance by peers led to the selection of key articles from each category. The highest-ranked articles are briefly summarized, with a mention of their importance within health-system pharmacy. The other articles are listed for further review and evaluation. It is important to routinely review the published literature and to incorporate significant findings into daily practice. This article assists in identifying and summarizing the most impactful publications. Health-system pharmacists have an active role in improving the MUP in their institution, and awareness of the significant published studies can assist in changing practice at the institutional level.

Alteplase- and Tenecteplase-Related Errors and Risk Mitigation Strategies in the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Study of Event Reports From 52 Hospitals

Background: Alteplase and tenecteplase are thrombolytic agents used to treat patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Despite the convenient bolus dosing of tenecteplase, its off-label use for AIS creates new patient safety challenges that are understudied. Methods: The study was conducted in two parts. In Part I, we queried the Pennsylvania Patient Safety Reporting System (PA-PSRS) database for event reports involving alteplase and tenecteplase that were submitted between 2017 and 2022. Based on results from Part I, in Part II we narrowed the query to reports submitted in 2021–2022 and applied inclusion criteria to identify reports that described a medication error involving the use of alteplase or tenecteplase to treat AIS. In Part II, all reports were reviewed and coded for stages of the medication-use process, associated factors, and event type. Results: Part I results (N=858) showed a decrease in reports of alteplase events and an increase in reports of tenecteplase events. In Part II (N=92), 52% of reports involved alteplase and 48% involved tenecteplase. Wrong dose was the most frequently coded event type for both medications at a combined 48%. Several tenecteplase-related events were attributed to unfamiliarity with the medication, confusion between indications, and incorrect use of the electronic health record (EHR) or failure to use the EHR, whereas many errors unique to alteplase occurred during the multistep calculation, preparation, and administration processes. Conclusions: Safety events involving alteplase and tenecteplase in the treatment of AIS are diverse. We present a list of potential strategies to prevent and mitigate errors involving these high-alert medications and encourage providers to adopt those that are meaningful to their workflow and practice setting.

Practice-enhancing publications about the medication-use process in 2022.

This article identifies, prioritizes, and summarizes published literature on the medication-use process (MUP) from calendar year 2022 that can impact health-system pharmacy daily practice. The MUP is the foundational system that provides the framework for safe medication utilization within the healthcare environment. The MUP is defined in this article as having the following components: prescribing/transcribing, dispensing, administration, and monitoring. Articles evaluating at least one step of the MUP were assessed for their usefulness toward practice improvement. A PubMed search was conducted in January 2023 for articles published in calendar year 2022 using targeted Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) keywords, and searches of the table of contents of selected pharmacy journals were conducted, providing a total of 6,213 articles. A thorough review identified 69 potentially practice-enhancing articles: 13 for prescribing/transcribing, 13 for dispensing, 5 for administration, and 38 for monitoring. Practice trends discussed in the articles are briefly summarized, with a mention of their importance within health-system pharmacy. The articles are listed and summarized in tables for further review and evaluation. It is important to routinely review the published literature and to incorporate significant findings into daily practice. This article assists in identifying and summarizing the most impactful publications. Health-system pharmacists have an active role in improving the MUP in their institution, and awareness of the significant published studies can assist in changing practice at the institutional level.

Enteral nutrition: An underappreciated source of patient safety events.

Enteral nutrition (EN) therapies are prescribed for patients not able to maintain adequate nutrition through the oral route. Medical errors and close calls associated with the provision of EN therapy leading to actual and potential patient harm have been reported. The purpose of this study was to determine the number, type, and severity of safety events related to the provision of EN therapies reported to a national database and provide workable recommendations from the literature to improve safety. An interdisciplinary team queried the National Center for Patient Safety (NCPS) Joint Patient Safety Reporting (JPSR) system using keywords related to EN therapy use. The team reviewed the number, type, and severity of reported events and safety codes as categorized by the NCPS and then thematically classified the narratives using the Medication Use Process (MUP). Our query revealed 1227 safety events related to the EN keywords. Thematic analysis of the top five event subtypes (n = 1030) revealed that there were 691 EN safety reports directly related to an MUP step, and the majority fell into the steps of administering (31%), followed by monitoring (28%), dispensing (26%), prescribing (11%), and transcription (4%), with many events involving more than one MUP step. Safety events associated with the provision of EN therapies leading to patient harm have been reported to the JPSR system. To improve safety related to EN use, modifications to prescribing, transcribing/documenting, dispensing, administering, and monitoring of prescribed EN therapies are needed.

Two-year audit of compliance in the preparation and administration of medications by nursing staff in a mother-and-child university hospital center

ObjectiveAudits are essential for reviewing and improving the medication-use process. Identifying areas for improvement can limit the risk of errors when preparing and administering drugs. Pediatric centers face specific challenges in ensuring the safety of the medication-use process. The objective of this study was to observe and compare compliance with criteria for the preparation and administration of medications by nurses in a mother-and-child university hospital center over two consecutive years. MethodsThis observational cross-sectional study was conducted in a Canadian mother-and-child university hospital center. Audits were conducted over a 1-month period in 16 and 18 nursing care sectors in 2021 and 2022, respectively. The standardized audit evaluated compliance with prespecified criteria related to the preparation and administration of medication by nursing staff (77 criteria for 2021 and 82 criteria for 2022). The auditors comprised nurses and a pharmacist trained by the research team. Compliance was compared between years and assessed through a chi-square test. ResultsThe audit consisted of 522 observations in 2021 and 448 observations in 2022. Overall compliance was 76% in 2021 and 66% in 2022. The compliance rate by criterion ranged from 16% to 100%. In 2021 and 2022, 51 (84%) and 52 (87%) of the criteria, respectively, had compliance rates of more than 75%, and 12 (20%) and eight (13%), respectively, had 100% compliance. There were statistically significant decreases in compliance for nine of the 39 criteria for preparation of medications, notably prior hand hygiene (91%% vs. 84%, p = 0.002), and for six of the 17 criteria for administration of medications, including mentioning possible adverse effects to the patient (41% vs- 30%, p = 0.008). ConclusionIn this study, compliance was over 75% for most of the criteria. However, for a few criteria, we observed a decrease in compliance from 2021 to 2022. Various hypotheses are proposed to explain these decreases, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Use of Computerized Physician Order Entry with Clinical Decision Support to Prevent Dose Errors in Pediatric Medication Orders: A Systematic Review.

Prescribing is a high-risk task within the pediatric medication-use process and requires defenses to prevent errors. Such system-centric defenses include electronic health record systems with computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and clinical decision support (CDS) tools that assist safe prescribing. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of CPOE systems with CDS functions in preventing dose errors in pediatric medication orders. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 criteria and Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) items. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021277413). The final literature search on MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, and EMB Reviews was conducted on 10 September 2023. Only peer-reviewed studies considering both CPOE and CDS systems in pediatric inpatient or outpatient settings were included. Study selection, data extraction, and evidence quality assessment (JBI critical appraisal tool assessment and GRADE approach) were carried out by two individual reviewers. Vote counting method was used to evaluate the effects of CPOE-CDS systems on dose errors rates. A total of 17 studies published in 2007-2021 met the inclusion criteria. The most used CDS tools were dose range check (n = 14), dose calculator (n = 8), and dosing frequency check (n = 8). Alerts were recorded in 15 studies. A statistically significant reduction in dose errors was found in eight studies, whereas an increase of dose errors was not reported. The CPOE-CDS systems have the potential to reduce pediatric dose errors. Most beneficial interventions seem to be system customization, implementing CDS alerts, and the use of dose range check. While human factors are still present within the medication use process, further studies and development activities are needed to optimize the usability of CPOE-CDS systems.

A facility-level self-assessment of Autonomous Pharmacy Framework levels.

The objective of this study was to understand at what level of the Autonomous Pharmacy Framework facilities are operating, in terms of the current state of data collection and analysis in the medication-use process, and to gather insights about systems integration and automation use. The Autonomous Pharmacy Advisory Board, a group of chief pharmacy officers and operational leaders, developed a self-assessment instrument based on the previously published Autonomous Pharmacy Framework, made the self-assessment instrument available via the internet, and reviewed respondents' self-reported results. The data collection period for the survey started in March of 2021 and ended in January of 2023. A total of 119 facility-level self-assessments were completed and analyzed. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 represented little or no data-driven automation with lots of manual tasks and 5 represented the utmost data-driven automation with few manual tasks, the average overall facility-level score was 2.77 (range, 1.38-4.41). Results revealed slight variance by facility bed capacity. Much more variation was found in the degrees to which individual facilities have automated core processes like inventory management, intravenous medication preparation, and financial reporting. As a baseline, this automation-focused facility self-assessment suggests that for essentially all health-system pharmacy facilities and their larger organizations, a substantial body of work needs to be done to further develop and upgrade technology and practice in tandem, greatly expand data collection and analysis, and thereby achieve better operational, financial, and clinical outcomes. Significant advancements are needed to arrive at the highly reliable, highly automated, data-driven medication-use process involving few repetitive manual tasks envisioned in the Autonomous Pharmacy Framework.

Pharmacist roles in the medication use process: Perceptions of patients, physicians, and pharmacists

ObjectivesIt is uncertain whether stakeholder perceptions of pharmacist roles in the medication use process (MUP) have evolved alongside pharmacist advanced scope of practice. This study aimed to examine patient, pharmacist, and physician perceptions of pharmacist roles in the MUP. DesignThis IRB-approved study used a cross-sectional design with online panels of patients, pharmacists, and physicians. Setting and ParticipantsA Qualtrics panel of 1,004 patients, 205 pharmacists, and 200 physicians completed the surveys between August-November 2021. Outcome MeasuresUsing role theory as framework, 12-item surveys were developed to examine perceptions regarding effectiveness of and best choice for improving each MUP step. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, correlations, and comparisons. ResultsMajority of the physician, pharmacist, and patient samples believed that physicians prescribe the best possible medications (93.5%, 83.4%, 89.0% respectively), prescriptions are filled accurately (59.0%, 61.4%, 92.6% respectively) and timely (86.0%, 68.8, 90.2% respectively). Majority of physicians (78.5%) opined prescriptions are generally error free and patients are monitored (71%); fewer pharmacists agreed (42.9%, 51%; p<0.05). Most patients (92.4%) reported taking medications as directed; only 60% professionals agreed (p<0.05). Physicians selected ‘pharmacists’ as top choice for reducing dispensing errors, providing counseling, and helping patients take medications as directed. Patients wanted pharmacists to help manage their medications (87.0%) and ‘someone’ to periodically check on their health (100%). All 3 groups agreed physician-pharmacist collaboration was important to improve patient care and outcomes (90.0%-97.1%); however, 24% of physicians were uninterested in collaboration. Both professionals reported lack of time, appropriate setup, and interprofessional communication as challenges to collaboration. ConclusionPharmacists believe their roles have evolved to align with expanded opportunities. Patients perceived pharmacists play comprehensive roles in medication management through counseling and monitoring. Physicians recognized pharmacist roles in dispensing and counseling, but not in prescribing or monitoring. Clarity in role expectations amongst these stakeholders is critical to optimizing pharmacist roles and patient outcomes.

Critical vulnerabilities for diversion of controlled substances in the emergency department: Observations and healthcare failure mode and effect analysis

Objectives Drug theft by healthcare workers is a recognized problem in emergency departments (EDs) that can lead to patient, healthcare worker, and organization harm. Diversion takes various forms, including tampering with syringes, pilfering from waste containers and falsely documenting drug administration. Before implementing risk-mitigating interventions, we need a detailed understanding of the vulnerabilities in ED medication-use processes. This study sought to identify the critical failure modes (CFMs) within EDs that increase diversion risk and characterize the system factors contributing to CFMs. Methods Between June 2018 and February 2019, we conducted observations in two Ontario EDs. Observers recorded tasks carried out by nurses, pharmacists, and physicians. We performed a Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis, informed by the observation data, to proactively identify CFMs in the medication-use processes. Failure modes were coded for their effects on diversion risk and the contributing system factors. Results We identified 28 CFMs that increase diversion risk by enabling inappropriate access to controlled substances or compromising documentation. CFMs are multifactorial, stemming primarily from factors related to person (e.g., intent to divert) and tools/technology (e.g., limited automatic reconciliation of records), followed by organization (e.g., practices that diffuse accountability), environment (e.g., workspaces that obscure illicit behaviours), and task (e.g., unstructured processes leading to lapses). Conclusion The study findings inform opportunities to revise vulnerable processes and bolster safeguards, decreasing diversion risk and protecting patients and healthcare workers.

Evaluation of Detected Medication Errors Within the Operating Room at an Academic Medical Center.

Background: Medication errors are preventable events that lead to inappropriate medication use and potential patient harm. This is especially prevalent within the operating room (OR) where one practitioner is involved in the entire medication-use process. Despite recent implementation of BD Pyxis™ Anesthesia ES, Codonics Safe Label System, and Epic One Step at the University of Kentucky Healthcare (UKHC) to prevent medication errors, errors continue to be reported. Curatolo et al found human error was the most frequent cause of medication error within the OR. Clumsy automation may be an explanation for this, which imposes burdens and promotes work arounds. This study endeavors to assess potential medication errors via chart review to identify risk reduction strategies. Methods: This a single-center retrospective cohort review of patients admitted to a UK HealthCare Main Operating Room, defined OR1A-OR5A and OR7A-OR16A, who were administered medications from 8/1/2021 to 9/30/2021. Results: Over a 2-month period, 145 cases were conducted at UK HealthCare. Of the 145 cases, 98.6% (n = 143) involved a medication error and 93.7% (n = 136) of the errors involved a high-alert medication. The top 5 classes of drugs involved in errors were all high-alert medications. Lastly, 46.6% (n = 67) of cases had documentation that Codonics was utilized. In addition to analyzing medication errors, the financial analysis found that $3154.04 in drug cost was lost in the study period. When extrapolating these results to all BD™ Pyxis Anesthesia Machines at UK HealthCare, $107 237.36 of drug cost is potentially lost per year. Conclusions: These findings add to previous data that have described the increased rate of medication errors when conducting chart review rather than rely on self-reported data. In this study, 98.6% of all cases involved a medication error. In addition, these findings provide additional insight in the increased use of technology within the operating room despite medication errors still occurring. These results can be applied to like institutions to critically evaluate anesthesia workflow to determine risk reduction strategies.

Impact of a standardized order set and medication-use process on medication error rates in sexual assault patients presenting to the emergency department for HIV nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis.

To evaluate the impact of a standardized order set and medication-use process on antiretroviral medication errors in sexual assault (SA) patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) for nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (nPEP). In November 2019, a multidisciplinary group collaborated on an initiative to improve the nPEP medication-use process for SA patients presenting to the EDs within a large integrated health system. Electronic medical records of patients 13 years of age or older who presented for SA examination and were prescribed nPEP during the pre- (February 2018-August 2019) and poststandardization (February 2020-August 2021) periods were included. The primary objective was to compare the proportion of patients experiencing a medication error before and after SA/nPEP process standardization. Data regarding the following medication errors were evaluated: incomplete regimen; inappropriate/duplicative regimen; dosing, frequency, or quantity prescribed error; and initiation of nPEP without an HIV test. Two hundred six patients met criteria for inclusion. A higher proportion of patients experienced medication errors in the prestandardization group relative to the poststandardization group (46.5% vs 11.9%, P < 0.001). Fifty-five errors were observed in the prestandardization group, compared to 16 errors in the poststandardization group. The majority of errors in the prestandardization group were directly related to antiretroviral regimens, while the majority of errors in the poststandardization group involved initiation of nPEP without an HIV test. The standardization of the SA/nPEP process was associated with significantly lower medication error rates. Optimization of medication-use technology is an effective strategy in reducing medication errors.

Impact of pharmaceutical care pathway established in hepatobiliary surgery.

Clinical pharmacists play a pivotal role in ensuring medication safety due to their detailed understanding of the medication-use process. This study aimed to propose the concept of pharmaceutical care pathway (PCP) in surgical care and design the work pattern and workflow in the healthcare systems of China. Data were collected from patients in the Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery of the First People's Hospital of Lianyungang in China between January 2019 and December 2019. The study was conducted using 346 patients in the control group and 363 in the intervention group. The control group was managed only by the clinical pathway (CP), while the intervention group was managed by the CP and PCP. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs), patient satisfaction, hospital expense, drug cost, length of stay, and prescription situations were documented. Using PCP, the rational use of drugs increased from 56% in the control group to 94.2% in the intervention group. Further, 124 (35.8%) ADRs in the control group and 44 (12.1%) ADRs in the intervention group were assessed using the Karch and -Lasagna scale. The mean hospital expense was 21,949.12 ± 2,311.25 yuan in the control group and 17,566.25 ± 1,082.56 yuan in the intervention group. The mean drug cost was 6,250.69 ± 589.35 yuan and 4,894.22 ± 356.14 yuan (1 US$ = 6.37 yuan). The mean length of stay was 12.23 ± 2.51 days and 8.35 ± 1.32 days in the control and intervention groups, respectively. Patient satisfaction increased significantly. PCP reduced the length of stay for patients and drug-related adverse events, increased the rational use of drugs, cost-effectiveness, patient satisfaction, and consequently, improved the quality of service in surgery medicine.

Medication use process and assessment of extemporaneous compounding and alternative routes of administration of oral oncology drugs: Guidance for clinical and oncology pharmacists

AbstractCancer treatment is evolving. Oral formulations offer potentially more convenient, effective alternatives to conventional chemotherapy for many cancers. An appealing aspect of oral antineoplastic agents is their relative ease of administration; unfortunately, patients may have difficulty swallowing the tablets or capsules. This shift towards oral administration and the accompanying issues around oral medication adherence highlights the need to assess the safety and feasibility of delivery methods for patients unable to swallow solid dosage forms. A new medication‐use process (MUP) was created to facilitate extemporaneous compounding of oral oncology drugs (OOD). Systematic review consisting of tertiary resources, drug manufacturers, and primary literature was performed to identify information related to extemporaneous compounding or alternative routes of administration for a predetermined list of OODs. A single‐center retrospective review was conducted of patients receiving liquid formulations of OODs to characterize institutional experience. Overall, 116 OODs were reviewed. The majority of OODs had information describing extemporaneous compounding or alternative routes of administration (31% with commercial liquid formulations available or information in tertiary resources; 33% with off‐label manufacturer information or case reports) while 36% had no data. The MUP included three compounding workflows to account for available solid dosage formulations (tablet, hard capsule, gelatin capsule) and creation of an electronic health record order template. Retrospective review identified 41 patients who received compounded liquid formulations of 14 OODs for 13 indications. Liquid OODs were used for a median of 3‐5 days. None of the 41 patients experienced discernable safety or overt effectiveness concerns readily attributed to use of liquid OODs. Implementation of a novel MUP and systematic review of OODs aids the pharmacist in standardizing institutional practice and mitigates risks associated with extemporaneous liquid formulations of OODs facilitating medication delivery of new agents to patients unable to swallow solid dosage forms.