Pdf

Author(s)

Elisabetta Volpi, Giuseppa Lo Surdo, Sara Tonazzini, Stefania Alduini, Maurizio Mangione, Umberto Paradossi, Monica Baroni, Sergio Berti, Stefania Biagini

Why was it done?

Several data suggest that pharmacists and physician collaboration, direct pharmacist interaction with patients or caregivers through medication reconciliation and discharge counselling decreases the number of adverse drug events (ADEs) and plays an overall positive role in transitional care. Our aim is to demonstrate the constant necessity of pharmacist led medication reconciliation in order to maintain a high standard of care and safe medication use.

What was done?

Medication reconciliation at hospital discharge is essential for the prevention of medication discrepancies and patient harm. Hospital pharmacists are recognised as one of main healthcare providers that can support the physicians in this activity.
Since 2016, the medication reconciliation process has been performed by physicians and clinical pharmacists before home discharge from the Heart Hospital, Fondazione Toscana G.Monsaterio in Italy.

How was it done?

We analysed the medication reconciliation activity performed in our hospital over time and we observed that the number of unintentional discrepancies was always around 20%.
A shared pre-discharge prescription review programme has been activated with all doctors, so when the final lists of drug prescriptions are ready, the pharmacist examines them and suggests improvements or corrections to the doctor before the discharge letter is delivered to patients. Among the unintentional discrepancy observed, the most frequent were omissions of chronic therapy, lack of information about suspension for low molecular weight heparin or antibiotics.

What has been achieved?

A strong collaboration between physicians and clinical pharmacists has been achieved as we shared the results of this improvement. The same activity has been required and extended to the paediatric ward where the demand of simple, clear and complete information is even more crucial given the particular inter-individual variability and fragility of this population.

What next?

We would like to improve the prescription review programme also at admission in order to minimise drug omissions and at transition between different wards or different hospitals with the aim of improving communication between health care settings.

Author(s)

Nina RANJIT, Matthieu GALLET, Anthony TRIPLET, Myriam QUERMONNE , Alexandre COCHET

Why was it done?

The rise of RLT is seeing the emergence of new treatments, using radioisotopes such as 177Lu or 223Ra. The radioactive nature of these treatments raises questions from patients. The aim of pharmaceutical consultations (PCs) is to respond to them by providing appropriate information on treatment modalities, adverse effects (AEs) and radiation protection rules. Thus, we carry out a PC at the initiation of an RIV for all new patients from January 2022 for PLUVICTO.

What was done?

Radioligand therapy (RLT) consists of the administration of a radioactive drug. It makes it possible to treat cancer patients by specifically targeting tumour cells and destroying them using ionising radiation.
These particular treatments raise questions from patients. This is why we have implemented pharmaceutical interviews since 2022 and the beginning of RLT by PLUVICTO® during the first treatment, for all patients concerned. Subsequently, these consultations were extended to other therapies (lutathera, xofigo).

How was it done?

Before initiating RLT to a new patient, radiopharmacists check the eligibility of patients and the conformity of the indication. A few days before the first treatment, the patient’s file is consulted and important information is noted (urinary or fecal incontinence, digestive problems, biological assessment, co-medications). The day of the treatment, a personalized care plan is drawn up by the radiopharmacist and an information sheet bringing together information on the treatment (interval of treatments, dose, etc.), side effects and their management and the rules of radiation protection are provided. to the patient.

What has been achieved?

Collaboration with nuclear doctors has been set up to optimise patient care and information.
When necessary, pharmaceutical interventions are formulated directly to the clinician and plotted in a table.
Facing the success of these PCs we implement them for lutathera and xofigo, the two other RLT available.
In case of side effects, we also declare it to the pharmacovigilance service and give advice to patients and/or clinicians for manage them.
All documents are recorded in the computerised patient file.

What next?

The next step is to evaluate patient’s comprehension before the first interview to adapt its content to the patient.
We also would like to evaluate the patient’s satisfaction and expectations.
Discussions are underway to financially promote these tripartite consultations as exists for oral chemotherapy consultations.

Pdf

Author(s)

Pilar Lalueza Broto, Laura Domenech Moral, Alba Pau Parra, Ángel Arévalo Bernabé, Danae Anguita Domingo, Anna Rey Pérez, Jacinto Baena Caparrós, Marcelino Baguena Martínez, María Queralt Gorgas Torner, Mónica Rodriguez Carballeira

Why was it done?

The four-year specialist training program for Hospital Pharmacy in Spain includes one year of clinical training, involving rotations through various medical units where residents develop their clinical skills. This forms an essential component of clinical proficiency and integration into the healthcare team.

The Intensive Care Unit (ICU) was chosen because the presence of a pharmacist during rounds as a full member of the care team has been associated with a reduced rate of adverse drug events.

What was done?

We developed a standardized medication audit tool to ensure uniform pharmaceutical care delivery, aligned with the Hospital Pharmacy Specialty training program.

How was it done?

We designed a pharmacotherapeutic monitoring chart containing biodemographic and clinical data, analytical parameters, and clinical issues for each patient. A multidisciplinary team, comprising staff physicians and pharmacy resident tutors, identified the most common clinical problems or key issues for different types of patients admitted to critical care units, as well as specific clinical problems related to particular pathologies. Pharmacotherapeutic recommendations were based on clinical evidence or internal protocols. Common key issues included nutritional support, fluid resuscitation, thromboembolic prophylaxis, hemodynamic monitoring, infection management, drug monitoring, and sedative and analgesic therapy. We defined specific efficacy and safety indicators for each clinical problem. Additionally, we monitored specific outstanding problems in particular patient types.

We also implemented a model for recording and coding pharmaceutical interventions.

What has been achieved?

The pharmacotherapeutic monitoring chart has enabled us to establish standards for pharmaceutical care in the ICU, promoting consistency among the entire care team and optimizing pharmacotherapy outcomes in patients. It also facilitates the assessment of residents’ skill acquisition during their training.

What next?

In the future, assessing the tool’s usefulness and its impact on residents’ training benefits will be of interest. Moreover, it may serve as a reference model for other clinical rotations.

Pdf

Author(s)

MARCELO DOMINGUEZ CANTERO, CARMEN MARIA DOMINGUEZ SANTANA, MARCELINO MORA CORTES, ESMERALDA RIOS SANCHEZ, JUAN MANUEL BORRERO RUBIO

Why was it done?

Patients who withdraw medication from outpatient pharmacies in Spanish hospitals are provided with pharmaceutical care and pharmaceutical care stratification tools in specific outpatient pharmacy consultations. These patients are usually multi-pathological with multiple drug interactions, contraindications, and important adverse effects. Therefore, during the hospital admission of these outpatients, it was appropriate to provide continuous care from the hospital pharmacy. Before the implementation of the protocol, there was no specific and systematic follow-up of hospitalized outpatients.

What was done?

Implementation of a protocol that provides pharmaceutical care to outpatients during hospitalization, ensuring continuity of care through the pharmacy service.

How was it done?

The main problem with the implementation was the real-time detection of hospitalized outpatients. The development of a software tool to facilitate the location of patients provided an impetus for the implementation of the project. The computer tool selected patients who met the inclusion criteria (hospitalized outpatients with medication withdrawal in the outpatient unit in the last two months). Patients treated with erythropoietin and colony stimulants were excluded.

What has been achieved?

Seventy-nine patients were included in the study between April and September 2023; 62.1% were male. Main pathologies included 41.9% oncohaematologic diseases, 18.9% human immunodeficiency virus, and 17.7% immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.
The reason for admission was related to the pathology for which outpatient medication was withdrawn in 27 patients (34.2%), and six patients (7.6 %) were admitted due to an AE of the medication withdrawn in outpatients. Pharmaceutical interventions (PI) were performed in 21.5% of the patients reviewed, and 76.5% were accepted. PI reasons included discontinuation of treatment (64.7 %), modification (17.7 %), initiation (11.8 %) and monitoring (5.9 %).

What next?

With our protocol, we want to show that outpatients within the pool of patients admitted to a hospital are a priority target group. For these patients, the hospital pharmacist can improve treatment during hospitalization with a high degree of pharmaceutical intervention.

Pdf

Author(s)

Almudena Ribed, Alvaro Gimenez-Manzorro, Beatriz Torroba-Sanz, Ana De Lorenzo-Pinto, Maite Portas-Gonzalez, Maria Dolores Ginel-Feito, Pilar Cabrerizo-Torrente, Maria Luisa Martin-Barbero, Ana Herranz-Alonso, Javier Hortal-Iglesias, María Sanjurjo-Saez

Why was it done?

There is a high prevalence of medication errors in the perioperative setting. Health organizations highlight the need for effective practices to ensure safe medication use. A group of pharmacists, surgeons, anaesthesiologists, nurses, and IT technicians coordinated by the management was formed in 2020. Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) of the perioperative use of drugs was performed in 2021. The group detected up to 25 failure modes and conducted a bibliographic review to gather and prioritise the implementation of safety practices.

What was done?

We re-engineered the process of medication use in the perioperative setting, from pre-admission to discharge, and implemented safety practices to improve safe medication use in the daily practice.

How was it done?

Obstacles were overcome as a result of the multidisciplinary teamwork, management support and the safety culture existing in our hospital. In addition, we listened to health professionals’ opinions, provided monthly information sessions in the Anaesthesia and Pharmacist Department in 2022 and disseminated information through the hospital website.

What has been achieved?

Eight safety practices were implemented in daily practice:
1.Eight safety practices were implemented in daily practice:
1. Implementation of automated dispensing cabinets.
2. Identification and recommendations for high risk drugs.
3. Standardisation of anaesthesia and difficult airway trolleys.
4. Preparation of general anaesthesia trays with ready to administer drugs.
5. Design, development, and implementation of a one-step computerised provider order entry (CPOE) in the operating room, with bar code administration technology.
6. Implementation of a pharmaceutical care programme for surgical patients based on medication reconciliation in all transitions of care.
7. Implementation of new alerts in the clinical decision support system linked to the CPOE to improve pain, anticoagulation, and antibiotic management in the surgical patient during follow-up.
8. Development of new protocols for perioperative management of chronic medications, anticoagulation, diabetes, and antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical setting.

What next?

The new medication-use process describes a practical and real approach to promote perioperative patient safety in the daily practice. Transfer into other centres is achievable by motivating healthcare professionals, engaging in safety culture and creating multidisciplinary alliances. There is a need to assess the impact and evaluate these safety practices to ensure ongoing improvement.

Pdf

Author(s)

Ann-Marie Goacher

Why was it done?

To add expert pharmacy skills to the uveitis MDT. Provide pharmacist led improved education, compliance, monitoring, follow up and access via helpline for uveitis patients on immunosuppression.

What was done?

Expansion of the uveitis (MDT) service to include a specialist pharmacist

How was it done?

COVID allowed us to pilot an innovative service enhancing uveitis patient care. An MDT was established consisting of a specialist consultant, two specialist doctors, optometrist and expert pharmacist in ophthalmology (EPO). The EPO supports weekly MDT sessions through establishing a patient helpline, standardised recorded counselling and on-going follow up of pharmaceutical needs of new and established patients. The main challenge was to obtain funding to maintain this service post COVID. Clinic space remains a challenge due to the limits imposed by the availability of rooms.

What has been achieved?

This innovative pharmacy service provides a blueprint for other specialities to incorporate expert pharmacy skills into the direct care of outpatients. Integration of the EPO into the uveitis MDT benefits clinicians by redirecting prescribing workload, reducing patient enquiries, improvements in clinic flow by moving patient counselling to the EPO and patient safety through instant access to pharmaceutical specialist knowledge. Initial informal MDT feedback has been positive.
Patients profit from access to EPO via the patient helpline. Analysis of 900 emails received over a 2-year period showed the main reasons patients contacted us were for enquires related to blood tests, medication supply, appointments, side effects, worsening symptoms and confirming instructions regarding medication. Feedback from a patient satisfaction survey overall was positive. Patients were asked to rate the service between 1 (poor) and 5 (excellent), with 31 patients responding. The results show access to the team was rated 4.6/5, satisfaction with the speed of the response was 4.29/5 and the quality of response was rated 4.48/5.

What next?

Improved IT databases is something for review, the main barrier being funding. This would make recording and auditing of patient interactions and data more robust. In the future I would like to see national guidance that recommends pharmacists as part of the uveitis MDT as standard.

Author(s)

Irene Centeno López, Eva M Legido Perdices, Maria José Cano Cano, Salvador Benlloch Pérez, Federico Peydró Tomás, José Manuel Ventura Cerdá

Why was it done?

Acetaminophen is the most used antipyretic and analgesic drug around the world. Intentional and non-intentional acetaminophen overdose is related to acute liver failure and it is important to start the treatment during the first hours after the intake to reduce liver injury. The main treatment to prevent liver failure is n-acetilcysteine (NAC) and it is administered depending on acetaminophen plasmatic concentrations using Rumack-Matthew nomogram during the first 24 hours. Variability in sampling time and duration of NAC administration was detected when acetaminophen intake was unknown or above the first 24h. Moreover, different NAC administration protocols were used in our institution.

What was done?

An interdisciplinary team involving Hospital Pharmacy, Emergency, Gastroenterology Department and Critical Care Unit was created to establish an agreed protocol for the management of acute acetaminophen poisoning.

How was it done?

The interdisciplinary team agreed the following procedures:
– To change the traditional NAC protocol of three intravenous infusions (150 mg/kg over 1 h, 50 mg/kg over 4h and 100 mg/kg over 16h) to the SNAP protocol of two bags (100 mg/kg over 2h and 200 mg/kg over 10h) reducing duration of administrations from 21 to 12 h.
– To establish the sampling times for the determination of acetaminophen serum concentrations: the extraction will be 4h after the ingestion during the first 24h of the intake. When time is unknown or greater than 24h, two samples separated by at least 2h will be extracted to calculate acetaminophen half-life to assess the probability of liver damage (high probability when half-life (t1/2)>4h).
– Define NAC discontinuation when INR<1.3, transaminases are in normal range and acetaminophen concentration<10 mcg/ml. If one of these parameters remains altered, the last NAC perfusion must be repeated.

What has been achieved?

– Reduce the duration of NAC treatment in the Emergency and hospitalization rooms if all analytical parameters are normalised.
– Reduce the variability in the management of acetaminophen poisoning and sampling time.
– To perform a closer clinical follow up of intoxicated/over-medicated patients.

What next?

Measure the reduction of hospital admissions and safety improvement by modifying NAC administration protocol and therapeutic drug monitoring of acetaminophen.

Pdf

Author(s)

Lucija Tominović Gjivić, Gabrijela Kos, Anita Šimić

Why was it done?

In order to ensure correct use of voretigene neparvovec and minimise the risks associated with its administration, the product can be distributed only through treatment centres where qualified staff (vitreoretinal surgeons and pharmacists) have participated in the mandatory risk management plan (RMP) education program required by EMA.
Since voretigene neparvovec has to be transported and stored frozen at ≤-65 ºC, has short shelf life after dilution (4 hours), contains genetically modified organisms and must be handled according to local biosafety guidelines, there was a need for establishing standard operating procedures (SOPs) for each step of the treatment process.

What was done?

The University Eye Clinic, University Hospital Sveti Duh in Zagreb, Croatia, was designated as the world’s 6th gene therapy centre in 2020.
Hospital pharmacists, as part of a multidisciplinary team, play an important role in preparation and administration of the gene therapy product voretigene neparvovec which is indicated for the treatment of patients with vision loss due to inherited retinal dystrophy caused by biallelic RPE65 (retinal pigment epithelium-specific 65 kilodalton protein) mutations.

How was it done?

The multidisciplinary team consists of a paediatric ophthalmologist, an inherited retinal disease specialist, retinal surgeons, pharmacists and nurses.
SOPs were created for: ordering process, storage of the product, coordination between members of the multidisciplinary team, preparation of the product, administration and disposal of waste.
Preparation of voretigene neparvovec is performed under aseptic conditions in a Class II vertical laminar flow biological safety cabinet (BSC) according to Pharmacy Manual which was ensured by the manufacturer.

What has been achieved?

Since 2020. there had been 47 dose applications of voretigene neparvovec (26 patients, Croatian and nonCroatian citizens).
The prevalence of inherited retinal dystrophy associated with biallelic RPE65 mutation is 1:200 000 and it is expected that there are 19 individuals (population of 3,8, million) with biallelic RPE65 mutation in Croatia, and 13 of them were detected since 2020.
There were no registered side effects which could be associated with errors during the preparation or administration of voretigene neparvovec.

What next?

With the increasing number of gene and cell-based therapies, the need for continuous education of hospital pharmacists and exchange their experiences is greater than ever.

Pdf

Author(s)

Jesper van Breeschoten, Chang Chui, Bert Storm, Grootswagers-Sobels Annemieke

Why was it done?

After the introduction of new medications in a hospital, it is uncommon for local treatment and administration protocols to be reevaluated in light of the latest scientific evidence. Infusion units are facing numerous challenges today, including staffing shortages and a growing number of patients receiving intravenous treatments. It may prove beneficial to periodically conduct a comprehensive review of the current protocols, with the objective of minimizing the time patients spend in the infusion unit and to prevent unnecessary use of medication while upholding the delivery of high-quality care.

What was done?

We performed an extensive review of treatment protocols for all medications administered at our infusion unit.

How was it done?

We performed an extensive review of treatment protocols for all medications administered at our infusion unit, drawing insights from the most recent literature. Our evaluation covered a range of factors, including premedication, infusion rates, observation periods, line flushing, administration routes, hydration strategies, and anti-emetic regimens. To provide additional data supporting protocol refinements, we utilized an electronic health record text mining tool known as CTcue, which facilitated the collection of retrospective patient information. Subsequently, these protocol modifications received unanimous approval from both pharmacist and attending specialist.

What has been achieved?

Treatment and administration protocols of 17 medications were optimized. We decreased infusion times for atezolizumab, bevacizumab, carboplatin, doxorubicine, durvalumab, folinic acid, irinotecan, panitimumab, vinblastine and vincristine. Vital sign assessment during infusion were omitted from protocols. Premedication and anti-emetic medication were converted to oral administration. Intravenous administration was converted to subcutaneous administration for abatacept, daratumumab, infliximab, tocilizumab, trastuzumab + pertuzumab and vedolizumab. Observation time after infusion was omitted for daratumumab, infliximab and vedolizumab. Based on the current literature, hydration schemes of cisplatin were shortened from 20 hours to 4 hours. The implementation of all optimization measures resulted in a reduction of ± 6000 hours of bed occupancy by patients annually. Based on our estimation, this has resulted in a reduction of approximately 16% in total time that beds were occupied.

What next?

We aim to periodically review our treatment and administration protocols and share our experiences with other hospital pharmacists. Other infusion units that also face challenges in shortness of staff may copy this blueprint to mitigate these problems.

Author(s)

Vanessa Gomes, Jonathan De Gregori, Greta Dusabe, Hélène Feyeux, Cyril Boronad

Why was it done?

MiS is a telephone service that provides free, reliable information about medicines to all patients and their caregivers. Requests are handled by experienced hospital pharmacists. It is important to know how patients behave after calling MiS in order to assess the benefits of this service on the proper use of medicines.

What was done?

The aim of this study was to assess patients’ behaviour regarding their medication after calling the MiS.

How was it done?

After prior agreement, patients were called back 7 days later to answer a specific survey including six questions: Was the medication changed after the call? Did the patient follow the advice of the MiS pharmacist? Did the patient consult a doctor? or another source of information? Did the patient feel that their health had improved? What are the benefits of this service?

What has been achieved?

Between 2024/03/05 and 2024/03/18, 20 callers completed the survey (65%). Most questions concerned drug interactions (48%), followed by side effects (22%), drug stability (7%), administrative information (7%), indications/contraindications (7%), product availability (3,%), proper use (3%) and dosage (3%). Thanks to the advice of MiS pharmacists, 47% of callers started taking their medication: half of these were prescribed by their doctor and the other half self-administered. Around a third of treatments were continued without change, while 6% were modified. Finally, 12% of treatments were discontinued because of side effects. After calling MiS, 15% of patients consulted a doctor and 15% consulted other sources of information (neighbours, health professionals, etc.). More than half of the patients felt that their health had improved after calling MiS. Lastly, 70% of patients described MiS as safe, 40% as accessible, 35% as available and 30% as a time-saver.

What next?

The demand for MiS shows that patients are looking for more information about their treatments, even if they have already consulted a healthcare professional. The number of treatments prescribed by the doctor that were only initiated after the call also illustrates the benefits of the MiS service. It is an additional service that can reassure callers and contribute to the proper use of medicines by conveying a positive image of treatments and information suited to callers’ knowledge.