The EAHP Board, elected for three-year terms, oversees the association’s activities. Comprising directors responsible for core functions, it meets regularly to implement strategic goals. Supported by EAHP staff, the Board controls finances, coordinates congress organization, and ensures compliance with statutes and codes of conduct.
Removing false beta-lactam allergy warnings: role of the clinical pharmacist in collaboration with the allergology service
European Statement
Clinical Pharmacy Services
Author(s)
Carlos Santos Rodríguez, Silvia Irene Corrales Vargas, Maria de los Ángeles Peña Peloche, Alfredo Julian Jover Sáenz, Miguel Ángel Ramos Gil, Arturo Morales Portillo, Marta Mir Cros, Francisco Ignacio Torres Bondia, Lluis Marqués Amat, Joan Antoni Schoenenberger Arnaiz
Why was it done?
Beta-lactam antibiotics are the most commonly used group of antimicrobial drugs but are also the ones with the most significant induction of allergic reactions. However, it is known that many of these patients do not present reactions upon rechallenge or have false allergy warnings in the medical records.
What was done?
To assess the impact of a pharmacist-driven programme for active beta-lactam allergy warning removal in adults in collaboration with the Allergology service.
How was it done?
We identified adults with active beta-lactam allergy warnings among outpatients aged 35 to 45 years over 26 months.
Both in the hospital and primary care setting the pharmacist assessed the current information of the cases in the electronic medical records (EMR) and through personal interviews or by telephone. The following data were retrieved: year of allergy registration, type of reaction described, tolerance of beta-lactam antibiotics, and the existence of Allergology reports.
The pharmacist, previously trained by the Allergology service, could proceed to remove or confirm the allergy label, if applicable, or refer the patient to the Allergology service for allergy tests.
What has been achieved?
We reviewed a total of 1178 cases with active beta-lactam allergy warnings. The most frequently implicated beta-lactam drug was amoxicillin, with 170/1178 (14.4%) cases.
111/1178 (9.4%) of cases had an allergic reaction in childhood, and in 714/1178 cases (60.6%) EMR did not describe the symptomatology or treatment that justifies the allergy.
The allergy warning was directly removed in 93/1178 (7.9%) of patients, as they had previous reports of Allergology, had tolerated antibiotics after the allergic reaction, or did not present symptoms compatible with an allergic reaction.
The review confirmed allergic warnings in 43/1178 (3.65%) cases, according to the symptomatology and the information recorded in the Allergology reports.
One thousand and forty-two cases were referred for beta-lactam allergy test performance in the allergology service, of which 47% yielded a negative result.
What next?
The pharmacist is qualified to remove the warning in cases with a doubtful allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics after a thorough medical record review and informed consent. Moreover, the pharmacist can provide valuable information that allows the classification of warnings according to the detected risk and facilitates subsequent decision-making by the allergist.
IMPLEMENTATION AND ADEQUACY OF HOME DELIVERY AND TELEPHARMACY DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
European Statement
Selection, Procurement and Distribution
Author(s)
Mª Ángeles Parro Martín, Beatriz Montero Llorente, Teresa Gramage Caro, Manuel Vélez Díaz-Pallarés, Miguel Ángel Rodríguez Sagrado, Hilario Martínez Barros, Ana María Álvarez Díaz
Why was it done?
To ensure continuity of treatment and pharmacotherapeutic follow-up in patients vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection included in a home delivery and telepharmacy program.
What was done?
Implementation and adaptation of home delivery and telepharmacy during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.
How was it done?
A work procedure was designed to detail the new functions to be performed by administrative assistants (AA), pharmacy technicians (PT) and pharmacists (PH). A first procedure was designed, which was adapted and improved after 6 months of experience, giving rise to procedure 2.
Procedure 1
– AA phone call to patients scheduled to obtain consent for home delivery and confirm delivery data.
– The PH grouped patients who had confirmed home delivery in the appointment manager.
– The PH reviewed the electronic prescription of all patients and performed telepharmacy to those who were due and/or had incidents.
– The PT prepared the packages.
Procedure 2
Phase 1
– The AA called all patients scheduled until the end of the year to offer them the option of remaining in the home delivery and telepharmacy program permanently. If they accepted, their consent and delivery data were recorded. From this point on, the call to offer home delivery and telepharmacy was discontinued; it was only offered to patients when they attended in person.
– A specific diary for home delivery patients was created.
– The telepharmacytelepharmacy was added to the PH diary.
Phase 2
– Trained PT in home delivery incident resolution (address changes, absent patients, package rejection) to reduce FAR’s working hours.
Phase 3
– Development of a computer application: computerization of manual processes (labels, identification of refrigerated shipments, SMS delivery confirmation sent to patients, and request for appointment changes).
What has been achieved?
31,066 home delivery have been performed on 7,170 different patients. 7,443 telepharmacy consultations have been performed.
PT training and computer development has reduced the PH dedication from 7 hours to 3 hours.
What next?
Establish criteria for prioritization of patients who are candidates for home delivery and telepharmacy.
Implementation of video call instead of telepharmacy
INTEGRATION OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL CARE RECORD INTO THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY ELECTRONIC OUTPATIENT RECORD
European Statement
Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
Why was it done?
So far, only pharmacists could access the pharmaceutical care record. The creation of the electronic medical record in the Health System has allowed patient data to be centralised and can be accessed easily and quickly. It is an opportunity to integrate our care service as pharmacists within the multidisciplinary care as well as to facilitate data consultation to other professionals that care for the same patient.
What was done?
Integrate the outpatient pharmaceutical care record to the electronic patient record via an application form included in the process of each pathology.
How was it done?
First question was where the application form should be included when the patient came in for a consultation. In order to unify all the actions relating to the process, it was decided to include the form in the main process instead of creating a specific process for the pharmacy department. For example, a form for an HIV patient should be included in his Infectious Disease Consult process.
Another issue was to define what items should be taken into account for the follow up.
Finally, the following items were included: reason for the visit, pathology, clinical data, outpatient treatment, regular treatment, drug-related problems, adverse drug allergies/past issues, adherence, checks to mark whether the patient has received the oral and written information, the leaflet from the host to the Outpatient Pharmacy Service and a free text to write down given recommendations.
What has been achieved?
Improvement of patient care, increased safety in the use of drugs and in the avoidance of medical errors has all been achieved, as well as the promotion of teamwork amongst professionals who attend to the patient. From the information technology perspective, data export can be provided for future researches.
What next?
All professionals should integrate their activities to take advantage of collaboration and increasing synergies.