Unintended Discrepancies Research Articles

Risk factors for medication errors at admission in preoperatively screened patients.

Preoperative screening (POS) may help to reduce medication errors at admission (MEA). However, due to the time window between POS and hospital admission, unintentional medication discrepancies may still occur and thus a second medication reconciliation at hospital admission can be necessary. Insight into potential risk factors associated with these discrepancies would be helpful to focus the second medication reconciliation on high-risk patients. To determine the proportion of POS patients with MEA and to identify risk factors for MEA. This single-centre observational cross-sectional study included elective surgical patients between October 26 and December 18, 2015. Main exclusion criteria were age younger than 18years and daycare admissions. Medication reconciliation took place at the POS and was repeated within 30hours of admission. Unintended discrepancies between the first and second medication reconciliation were defined as MEA. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with one or more MEA. The association of this outcome with potential risk factors was analysed using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Of the 183 included patients, 60 (32.8%) patients had at least one MEA. In a multivariate model, the number of medications at POS (adjusted odds ratio 1.16 [95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.30]) and respiratory disease (4.25 [1.52-11.83]) were significantly associated with MEA. In one-third of preoperatively screened patients, an MEA was found. The number of medications and respiratory comorbidities are risk factors for MEA in preoperatively screened patients.

Outcomes of a pharmacist-led medication review programme for hospitalised elderly patients.

Elderly patients are at risk of drug-related problems. This study aimed to determine whether a pharmacist-led medication review programme could reduce inappropriate medications and hospital readmissions among geriatric in-patients in Hong Kong. This prospective controlled study was conducted in a geriatric unit of a regional hospital in Hong Kong. The study period was from December 2013 to September 2014. Two hundred and twelve patients were allocated to receive either routine care (104) or pharmacist intervention (108) that included medication reconciliation, medication review, and medication counselling. Medication appropriateness was assessed by a pharmacist using the Medication Appropriateness Index. Recommendations made by the pharmacist were communicated to physicians. At hospital admission, 51.9% of intervention and 58.7% of control patients had at least one inappropriate medication (P=0.319). Unintended discrepancy applied in 19.4% of intervention patients of which 90.7% were due to omissions. Following pharmacist recommendations, 60 of 93 medication reviews and 32 of 41 medication reconciliations (68.7%) were accepted by physicians and implemented. After the program and at discharge, the proportion of subjects with inappropriate medications in the intervention group was significantly lower than that in the control group (28.0% vs 56.4%; P<0.001). The unplanned hospital readmission rate 1 month after discharge was significantly lower in the intervention group than that in the control group (13.2% vs 29.1%; P=0.005). Overall, 98.0% of intervention subjects were satisfied with the programme. There were no differences in the length of hospital stay, number of emergency department visits, or mortality rate between the intervention and control groups. A pharmacist-led medication review programme that was supported by geriatricians significantly reduced the number of inappropriate medications and unplanned hospital readmissions among geriatric in-patients.

The impact of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation during admission at tertiary care hospital.

Background Medication errors represent the most common type of error that compromises patient safety, with approximately 20% believed to result in harm. Over 40% of these errors are believed to result from inadequate medication reconciliation during admission, transfer, and discharge of patients and many of these errors could be prevented if adequate medication reconciliation processes were in place. In an effort to minimize adverse events caused during these care transitions, the Joint Commission has stated medication reconciliation as one of its National Patient Safety Goals and health care providers and organizations are encouraged to perform the process at various patient care transitions. Objective Identify the types of medication discrepancy that occurred during medication reconciliation performed by a pharmacist gathering the best possible medication history (BPMH). Estimate the potential for harm with each medication discrepancy using the severity rating methods developed by Cornish et al. (Arch Intern Med 165(4):424-429, 2005). Setting Tertiary care hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Method Prospective 3-month study on 286 adult patients, admitted for at least 24h and regularly taking at least four chronic prescription medications. Medication histories taken by physicians and by a pharmacist gathering the BPMH were compared. Identified discrepancies were reviewed by a panel of clinical pharmacists to assess the potential to cause patient harm with these errors. Main Outcome measure Number and types of medication discrepancies recorded by the pharmacist. Results Total number of medications recorded by physicians was 2548, versus 3085 by the pharmacist. 48.3% of patients had at least one unintended medication discrepancy by physicians. 537 medication discrepancies were reported (17.4% of number of medication discrepancies recorded by pharmacist). Types of medication discrepancies included, omissions (77% of discrepancies), commissions (13%), dosing errors (7%), and frequency errors (3%). 52% of the identified medication discrepancies had the potential to cause moderate to severe patient discomfort. Conclusion Patient medication histories are frequently recorded inaccurately by physicians during admission of patients which results in medication-related errors and compromises patient safety. Medication reconciliation is crucial in reducing these errors. Pharmacists can help in reducing these medication-related errors and the associated risks and complications.

Medication Errors at Hospital Admission and Discharge: Risk Factors and Impact of Medication Reconciliation Process to Improve Healthcare.

First, the aim of the study was to assess the prevalence, characteristics, and severity of unintended medication discrepancies (UMDs) and medication errors (MEs) at admission and discharge of hospitalization. Second, the aim of the study was to identify clinical and hospitalization factors associated with risk of UMDs as well as characteristics of the medication reconciliation process associated with UMDs detection. This prospective observational study included all adult patients admitted from 2013 to 2015 in the Endocrinology-Diabetology-Nutrition Department of Montpellier Hospital, France. Clinical pharmacists conducted medication reconciliation by collecting the best possible medication history from different sources and comparing it with admission and discharge prescriptions to identify discrepancies. Unintended medication discrepancies corrected by the physician were considered as MEs. Risk factors of UMDs were identified with logistic regression. Of 904 patients included, 266 (29.4%) had at least one UMD, at admission or at discharge. In total, 378 (98.2%) of 385 UMDs were considered to be MEs. Most MEs were omissions (59.3%). Medication errors were serious or very serious in 36% of patients and had potentially moderate severity in almost 40% of patients. The risk of UMDs increased constantly with the number of treatments (P < 0.001). Thyroid (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.12-2.86) and infectious diseases (adjusted OR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.17-2.78) were associated with UMDs risk at admission. The best type of source for the detection of UMDs was the general practitioner or nurse (OR = 2.64, 95% CI = 1.51-4.63). Unintended medication discrepancies are frequent at hospital and depend on intrinsic clinical parameters but also on practice of medication reconciliation process, such as number and type of sources used.

Decreasing Unintended Medication Discrepancies in Medication Reconciliation through Simple Yet Effective Interventions

Background: Medication reconciliation is the process of comparing a patient's medication orders to all of the medications that the patient has been taking. Unfortunately, medication errors are common in our health system accounting for significant proportion of patient harm. The main objective of our study was to explore the effect of self-designed intervention in improving the accuracy of patient current medication list in the outpatient settings. Methods: The study designed entailed collection of data from October 2013 to March 2014. The data collected in October (The pre-intervention) was compared to the post-intervention data in March 2014. Following interventions were performed: Education of residents, nurses and patients, frequent reminders to the residents to perform medication reconciliation, sending notifications to the residents who failed to perform medication reconciliation, reminding the patients get all refills at the time of appointment and reminding the patients to bring pill bottles at each appointment. The pre-intervention data was compared with the post-intervention data for different types of medication errors. Normality of the variables was pre assessed. Non-parametric analysis using Fisher’s exact test was performed for comparison of categorical variables. Conclusion: In conclusion, our intervention improved the accuracy of patient current medication list in the electronic records as accurate as possible. For clinics and hospitals, medication reconciliation can enhance delivery of high value cost conscious care to the patients by reducing medication errors.

'What is not written does not exist': the importance of proper documentation of medication use history.

Medications are perceived as health risk factors, because they might cause damage if used improperly. In this context, an adequate assessment of medication use history should be encouraged, especially in transitions of care to avoid unintended medication discrepancies (UMDs). In a case-controlled study, we investigated potential risk factors for UMDs at hospital admission and found that 150 (42%) of the 358 patients evaluated had one or more UMDs. We were surprised to find that there was no record of a patient and/or relative interview on previous use of medication in 117 medical charts of adult patients (44.8%). Similarly, in the medical charts of 52 (53.6%) paediatric patients, there was no record of parents and/or relatives interviews about prior use of medications. One hundred thirty-seven medical charts of adult patients (52.4%) and seventy-two medical charts of paediatric patients (74.2%) had no record about medication allergies and intolerances. In other words, there was a lack of basic documentation regarding the patient's medication use history. As patients move between settings in care, there is insufficient tracking of verbal and written information related to medication changes, which results in a progressive and cumulative loss of information, as evidenced by problems associated with clinical transfers and medication orders. Proper documentation of medication information during transfer is a key step in the procedure; hence, it should be rightly performed. It remains unclear whether interviews, and other investigations about medication use history have been performed but have not been recorded as health-care data. Therefore, it is crucial to the improvement of medication use safety that documentation of all drug-related information-even if not directly relatedto the actual event-become routine practice in health-care organizations, since 'what is not written does not exist'.

Hazardous Drug Diversion of Valproate from a General Practitioner to his Patient's Dog.

General practitioners are key stakeholders in good prescribing practices. More than half of patients have at least one unintended medication discrepancy upon hospital admission, some of which have the potential to cause severe discomfort or clinical deterioration. We report a case of a drug mistakenly administered to a 66-year-old man with cirrhosis and chronic alcoholism. Based on his regular prescription, he received 1 g/day of valproate during a hospitalization for cardiac valve surgery. This anticonvulsant was initially prescribed by his general practitioner for his epileptic dog and has been added to his own prescription to be covered by the French national health insurance. The aim of this article is to emphasize that general practitioners, physicians, and pharmacists have a major role to play in preventing the diversion of prescription drugs and limiting the risk of adverse drug events.

Patients with diabetes are at high risk of serious medication errors at hospital: Interest of clinical pharmacist intervention to improve healthcare

BackgroundMedication errors (ME) are major public health issues in hospitals because of their consequences on patients' morbi-mortality. This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of ME at admission and discharge of hospitalization in diabetic and non-diabetic patients, and determine their potential clinical impact. MethodThis prospective observational study was conducted at the Endocrinology-Diabetology-Nutrition Department. All adult patients admitted were eligible. A total of 904 patients were included, of which 671 (74.2%) with diabetes mellitus. Clinical pharmacists conducted medication reconciliation: they collected the Best Possible Medication History and then compared it with admission and discharge prescriptions to identify medication discrepancies. ME were defined as unintended medication discrepancies if corrected by the physician. ResultsClinical pharmacists allowed correcting ME in 176/904 (19.5%) patients at admission and in 86/865 (9.9%) patients at discharge. More than half of ME were omissions. Diabetic patients were more affected by ME than non-diabetic patients, both at admission (22.1% vs 12.0%, p<0.001) and at discharge (11.4% vs 5.7%, p=0.01). The diabetic group also had more potentially severe and very severe ME. Diabetic patients had on average twice more medications than non-diabetic patients (8.7±4.5 vs 4.4±3.4, p<0.001). The polypharmacy associated with diabetes, but not diabetes mellitus itself, was identified as a risk factor of ME. ConclusionsThe intervention of clinical pharmacists allowed correcting 378 ME in 25.8% of the cohort before they caused harm. Clinicians, pharmacists and other health care providers should therefore work together to improve patients' safety, in particular in high-risk patients such as diabetic patients.

Economic value of pharmacy-led medicines reconciliation at admission to hospital: an observational, UK-based study

ObjectiveTo describe the cost–benefits of pharmacy-led medicines reconciliation (MR) on admission by applying a theoretical model (University of Sheffield School of Health and Related Research—SCHARR model) to real-world data.MethodsThis was...

Pharmacist's Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment: Introduction and Evaluation at Elderly Patient Admission.

BackgroundThe role of the clinical pharmacist within the healthcare system remains unclear.ObjectiveOur objective was to describe a pharmacist’s comprehensive geriatric assessment (pCGA) at admission of elderly patients and to assess its relevance in terms of medication compliance and pharmacist interventions (PIs).MethodsWe conducted a prospective interventional study over 29 months in a 34-bed medical/rehabilitation geriatric ward in a French geriatric hospital. At admission, patients received pharmaceutical care through a consistent three-step process: (1) pharmacists met with the patient to undertake cognitive screening and assess their medication adherence (using the Girerd score) and medication history; (2) medication reconciliation was conducted at admission to detect intentional and unintentional discrepancies in treatment; and (3) clinical medication review was carried out throughout the patient’s stay. The pharmacist conveyed proposed interventions to optimise treatment to the physician through the electronic health record. The number and type of PIs and their rate of implementation were recorded.ResultsIn total, 539 patients aged >65 years were included; their mean age was 84 years. Cognitive screening showed that 45% of patients were confused at admission. Medication adherence assessment indicated that 50.2% had adherence problems. Medication reconciliation at admission detected discrepancies in 48%, with a mean of 1.09 unintended discrepancies per patient. Patients were taking an average of 7 ± 3 drugs. In total, 828 PIs were reported to physicians; 520 were accepted and implemented (62.8% acceptance rate).ConclusionThis approach helps to avoid medication errors and enables the suggestion of relevant PIs, which were implemented by physicians in two-thirds of cases.

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

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

Estudio prospectivo en dos hospitales

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study is to know the incidence rate of medication reconciliation at admission and discharge in patients of La Rioja and to improve the patient safety on medication reconciliation. Material and methodsAn observational prospective study, part of the Joint Action PaSQ, Work Package 5, European Union Network for Patient Safety and Quality of Care. The study has taken into account the definitions of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices. Any unintended discrepancy in medication between chronic treatment and the treatment prescribed in the hospital was considered as a reconciliation error. ResultsA total of 750 patients were included, 9 (1.2%) of whom showed at least one discrepancy. The patients had a total of 3,156 mediations registered: 2,313 prescriptions (73.4%) showed no differences, while 821 prescriptions (26%) were intended discrepancies and 21 prescriptions (0.6%) unintended discrepancies were considered by the physician as reconciliation errors. A percentage of 1.2 of the patients, which represents 0.6% of the medicines (one in 166 medications registered) had reconciliation errors during their hospital stay. ConclusionsA proceeding has been implemented by means of the physician doing the medication reconciliation and reviewing it with the help of a medication reconciliation form. The medication reconciliation is a priority strategic objective to improve the safety of patients.

Medication Discrepancies Associated With a Medication Reconciliation Program and Clinical Outcomes After Hospital Discharge.

To identify the frequency of unintended medication discrepancies 30 days postdischarge from medicine wards with interprofessional medication reconciliation processes and clinical import. Prospective cohort study of adults discharged between October 2013 and November 2014 from two teaching hospitals in Edmonton, Canada. The Best Possible Medication Discharge Plan (BPMDP) was prepared for all patients. Patients were called 30 days postdischarge to determine the medication discrepancy rate from the BPMDP and whether this was intentional or unintentional; three clinicians used standardized criteria to determine if the discrepancy was inconsequential. Electronic health records and patient contact were used to ascertain death, hospital readmissions, and emergency department (ED) visits at 90 days. Of 433 patients (mean age 64 yrs, 52% female, median discharge prescriptions 6 [interquartile range 4-9]), 168 (38.8%) had at least one unintentional medication discrepancy at 30 days (325 total discrepancies; median one [interquartile range 1-2 discrepancies per patient]). Patients with unintentional medication discrepancies were older (65.9 vs 61.9 yrs, p=0.03) with more discharge medications (7 vs 6, p=0.03). Most unintentional discrepancies (91.1%) were judged inconsequential. The presence of an unintentional medication discrepancy was not associated with 90-day readmission or death (42/167 [25.1%] vs 64/263 [24.3%], adjusted odds ratio 0.96 [95% confidence interval 0.60-1.54]) or ED visits (69 [41.3%] vs 101 [38.4%], adjusted odds ratio 1.11 [95% confidence interval 0.74-1.67]. Despite the presence of an interprofessional medication reconciliation process, over one-third of patients had a medication discrepancy within 30 days of discharge, although most were inconsequential and there was no association between unintended medication discrepancies and risk of readmission, ED visit, or death 3 months after discharge.

An evaluation of the epidemiology of medication discrepancies and clinical significance of medicines reconciliation in children admitted to hospital.

To determine the incidence of unintended medication discrepancies in paediatric patients at the time of hospital admission; evaluate the process of medicines reconciliation; assess the benefit of medicines reconciliation in preventing clinical harm. A 5 month prospective multisite study. Pharmacists at four English hospitals conducted admission medicines reconciliation in children using a standardised data collection form. A discrepancy was defined as a difference between the patient's preadmission medication (PAM), compared with the initial admission medication orders written by the hospital doctor. The discrepancies were classified into intentional and unintentional discrepancies. The unintentional discrepancies were assessed for potential clinical harm by a team of healthcare professionals, which included doctors, pharmacists and nurses. Medicines reconciliation was conducted in 244 children admitted to hospital. 45% (109/244) of the children had at least one unintentional medication discrepancy between the PAM and admission medication order. The overall results indicated that 32% (78/244) of patients had at least one clinically significant unintentional medication discrepancy with potential to cause moderate 20% (50/244) or severe 11% (28/244) harm. No single source of information provided all the relevant details of a patient's medication history. Parents/carers provided the most accurate details of a patient's medication history in 81% of cases. This study demonstrates that in the absence of medicines reconciliation, children admitted to hospitals across England are at risk of harm from unintended medication discrepancies at the transition of care from the community to hospital. No single source of information provided a reliable medication history.

Effectiveness of an electronic tool for medication reconciliation in a general surgery department.

Medication reconciliation is a key tool in the prevention of adverse drug events. To assess the impact of an electronic reconciliation tool in decreasing unintended discrepancies between medications prescribed after surgery and the patient's usual treatment. General Surgery Department of Gregorio Marañón's University General Hospital, Madrid. A pre-post intervention study with no equivalent control group was carried out between June 2009 and December 2010. Patients hospitalized in the General Surgery Department for 24 h or more, and whose prescriptions prior to admission included three or more drugs were included in the study. Patients were interviewed to gather information about their usual treatment drugs. Discrepancies between the latter and the drugs prescribed after surgery were assessed before and after the medication reconciliation electronic tool was implemented. Proportion of patients with at least one unintended discrepancy. A total of 107 patients in the pre-intervention phase and 84 patients in the post-intervention phase were included. We detected 1,678 discrepancies, 167 were found to be unintended. The number of patients with at least one unintended discrepancy was 43 (40.2 %) in the pre-intervention phase, and 38 (38.1 %) in the post-intervention phase, p = 0.885. The percentage of unintended discrepancies over the total amount of drugs reconciled was lower in the post-intervention phase than in the pre-intervention phase (6.6 vs. 10.6 %), p = 0.002. Regarding unintended discrepancies 79.2 % were grade C severity (the error reached the patient but caused no harm), 13.6 % grade D (the error reached the patient and required monitoring or intervention to preclude harm) and 7.1 % grade E (the error may have contributed to or resulted in temporary harm to the patient and required intervention). Implementation of an electronic tool facilitated the process of medication reconciliation in a general surgery unit. The proportion of unintended discrepancies over the total amount of drugs reconciled was reduced after the implementation of the reconciliation programme. However, we could not demonstrate a more significant impact due to some methodological limitations.

Reconciliation of Medication Discrepancies at Hospital Discharge for Inpatients in Medical Ward of St.Paul's Hospital Millennium Medical College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Background: Medication reconciliation is the comprehensive evaluation of a patient’s medication regimen any time there is a change in therapy in an effort to avoid medication errors such as omissions, duplications, dosing errors, or drug interactions, as well as to observe compliance and adherence patterns. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of medication discrepancies at discharge in St. Paul’s hospital millennium medical college. Methods and findings: A prospective cross sectional study was conducted at St. Paul’s hospital millennium medical college from March 14 - May 14 2013. The medical chart was screened for all consecutive patients discharged from the general internal medicine ward prospectively. During the study period 111 eligible patients were included in the analysis. The Data were abstracted using modified medication reconciliation tool to assess discrepancy. From 111 observations 46(41.4%) had at least one unintended discrepancy at the time of discharge, and 13(11.7%) had more than one unintended discrepancy. The most common unintentional discrepancy was discrepant dosing of the medication (45.6%), followed by omission of medication (30.4%). Cardiovascular medications were the most frequent drug classes with discrepancy (63%). Conclusions: Medication discrepancies are highly prevalent at hospital discharge with discrepant dosing of medication being identified as the most frequent type of medication discrepancy. Attention to the medication therapy and increased involvement of clinical pharmacists in the provision of pharmaceutical care are important measures.

Reducing medication errors at admission: 3 cycles to implement, improve and sustain medication reconciliation.

In France, medication errors are the third leading cause of serious adverse events. Many studies have shown the positive impact of medication reconciliation (MR) on reducing medication errors at admission but this practice is still rarely implemented in French hospitals. Implement and sustain a MR process at admission in two surgery units. The quality improvement approach used to meet this objective is described. The gastrointestinal surgery and orthopedic surgery departments of a 407 inpatient bed French teaching hospital. A step by step collaborative approach based on plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles. Three cycles were successively performed with regular feedback during multidisciplinary meetings. mean unintended medication discrepancies (UMDs) per patients at admission. The three PDSA cycles and the monitoring phase allowed to implement, optimize and sustain a MR process in the two surgery units. Cycle 1, by showing a rate of 0.65 UMDs at admission (95 % CI 0.39-0.91), underlined the need for a MR process; cycle 2 showed how the close-collaboration between pharmacy and surgery units could help to reduce mean UMDs per patients at admission (0.18; 95 % CI 0.09-0.27) (p < 0.001); finally, cycle 3 allowed the optimization of the MR process by reducing the delays of the best possible medication history availability. This work highlights how a collaborative quality-improvement approach based on PDSA cycles can meet the challenge of implementing MR to improve medication management at admission.

Impact of admission medication reconciliation performed by clinical pharmacists on medication safety

BackgroundMany activities contribute to reduce drug-related problems. Among them, the medication reconciliation (MR) is used to compare the best possible medication history (BPMH) and the current admission medication order (AMO) to identify and solve unintended medication discrepancies (UMD). This study aims to assess the impact of the implementation of admission MR by clinical pharmacists on UMD. MethodThis prospective study was carried out in two units of general medicine and infectious and tropical diseases in a 1844-bed French hospital. A retroactive MR performed in an observational period was compared to a proactive MR realized in an interventional period. We used a logistic regression to identify risk factors of UMD. ResultsDuring both periods, 394 patients were enrolled and 2,725 medications were analyzed in the BPMH. Proactive MR reduced the percentage of patients with at least one UMD compared with retroactive process (respectively 2.1% vs. 45.8%, p<0.001). Patients with at least one UMD during both periods were older compared to patients without UMD (79 vs. 72, p<0.005) and had more medications at admission (7 vs. 6, p<0.0001). UMD occur 38 times more often when there is no clinical pharmacist intervention. Among the 226 UMD detected in both periods, 42% would have required monitoring or intervention to preclude harm, and 10% had potential harm to the patient and 2% were life threatening. ConclusionProactive MR performed by clinical pharmacists is an acute process of detection and correction of UMD, but it requires a lot of human resources.

PS-055 Medicines reconciliation study at the emergency department

BackgroundMedicines reconciliation studies have produced estimates about rates of patients and drugs involved in unintended discrepancies along the reconciliation process, but to our knowledge no-one has worked out the reasons...

PS-084 Medicines reconciliation on admission and risk factors for error

BackgroundTransitions of care are high risk points for medicines errors, so that medicines reconciliation is essential for improving drug safety. It consists of identifying the most accurate list of the...