Pdf

Author(s)

Ignacio Salar Valverde, Maria García Coronel, Consolacion Pastor Mondéjar, Mayte Gil Candel, Iris Muñoz Garcia, Carles Iniesta Navalon, Elena Urbieta Sanz

Why was it done?

This project was carried out to avoid the possibility of contagion by SARS-CoV-2 when going to collect the medication. The circuit began at the end of March and the month of April 2020.

What was done?

Send the hospital dispensing medication to the patient’s home.

How was it done?

The first step was to specify the patient was considered at risk for SARS-CoV-2, in the end, patients over 65 years of age or immunosuppressed were considered at risk.
The second step was what order to follow to select and evaluate candidate patients for home delivery, for which the solution was simple, it was decided to follow the order of the pharmacy agenda for the collection of medication. The SELENE® electronic medical record program was used to evaluate the patient’s risk.
The third step was to contact him by phone, to check if there was a possibility of collecting the medication by a family member / caregiver, and if not, confirm a delivery address.
The last step was the preparation of the medication in the proper conditions of conservation and identified with the name and address of the patient. Shipments were organized from the pharmacy service. Patients were given an appointment in the pharmacy agenda for the next shipment.

What has been achieved?

There were 139 home deliveries of medication, 47 in March and 92 in April. Around 139 telephone calls were made, they are not counted, not all patients could be contacted in the first attempt, and up to three attempts were made per patient.
The majority, 124 shipments, were made through the service that the hospital made available to them, except for 13 that were made through the Red-Cross and 2 through Civil-Protection.

What next?

Although the delivery of medication at home and was already carried out in some pharmacy services, because of the pandemic it has spread to the rest of the hospitals in our country.
This service should be maintained, despite its cost, for patients who meet a series of criteria, which must be established and agreed upon. In addition, a telephone follow-up should be carried out on the patients that we send the medication to their home.

Pdf

Author(s)

MARGARITA BELTRAN GARCÍA, NATALIA MARTÍN FERNÁNDEZ, MERCEDES SALGUEIRO LAZO, SANTIAGO SANDOVAL FERNÁNDEZ DEL CASTILLO, MIGUEL ÁNGEL CALLEJA HERNÁNDEZ, ANTONIO LEÓN JUSTEL

Why was it done?

AKI is an underdiagnosed syndrome due to delay in detection and late referral to the nephrology unit. A real-time electronic alert system integrated into a multidisciplinary protocol could be useful for early identification and diagnosis.
Among the risk factors associated with AKI is the use of nephrotoxic drugs such as NSAIDs and COX-2, ACE inhibitors and ARA-II, Cyclosporine and Tacrolimus.

What was done?

A multidisciplinary protocol was established for the detection and early action of prerenal AKI inpatients with hospital and Primary Care monitoring.

How was it done?

An authomatic electronic tool, agreed between Biochemistry and Nefrology units, was designed for the selection of AKI patients. The pharmacist was contacted when a prerenal AKI was detected, who generated an alert in the electronic prescription system in order to recommend actions related to prescribed nephrotoxics drugs. An analysis was request to check renal function in these patients, after 48 hours in the hospital and after 1 month of discharge from the Primary Care.
There were many previous meetings and the leadership of each unit was maintained in the participation of strategies.

What has been achieved?

The aim was to improve the detection of prerenal AKI in inpatients and increase the quality of healthcare in these patients.
For this 3-month pilot phase, were selected 3 clinical unit and 9 prerenal AKI cases have been detected. The most frequent risk factors were: 9 cases due to volume deplection, 6 due to nephrotoxic drugs use and 3 due to chronic kidney damage (CKD). The measures adopted were: add fluid therapy in all cases, cancel nephrotoxic drugs and modify the diuretic drugs prescription in 6 of 7 cases. There was only 1 death.

What next?

This strategy will be extended to all hospital clinical units. Data will be obtained on incidence and morbidity and mortality in these patients, as well as on length of hospital stay.

Pdf

Author(s)

Noelia Vicente Oliveros, María Muñoz García, Álvaro Ruigomez Saiz, Montserrat Ferre Masferrer, Teresa Bermejo Vicedo, Eva Delgado Silveira, Lucía Quesada Muñoz, Ana María Alvarez-Diaz

Why was it done?

An analysis of the indicators of the perioperative process reflected the need to improve their quality. One of the causes of scheduled surgery cancellation was the lack of the follow up of the anaesthetist’s medication recommendations. Medications need to be carefully managed to prevent perioperative complications.

What was done?

We designed and implemented a flow chart to ensure the patient compliance of anesthetist’s medication recommendations prior to surgery. We designed a protocol for the perioperative medication management.

How was it done?

A multidisciplinary group was formed with the management of the hospital and representatives of all the services involved in the perioperative process. The group designed the flow chart of the process by consensus. Patients were candidates to enter in this process if they were on treatment with anticoagulant or 2 or more medications from the following groups: antiplatelet, antihypertensives, antidiabetics. A pharmacist called by phone three times (the day before, the day of medication change, and the day after) to the patient to ensure the compliance of anaesthetist recommendations. If there was a lack of compliance, the pharmacist contacted the surgeon who was in charge of deciding if the surgery procedure continued as scheduled. Moreover, the domiciliary medication of these patients were reconcilliated and recorded in their health record. Healthcare professionals could consult it during hospital stay. The group designed a protocol for the perioperative medication management with different medical specialists.

What has been achieved?

The project started in April 2019. The pharmacist called patients with scheduled surgery of lower limbs. A total of 31 patients benefited from the new flow chart. The pharmacist detected 38 medication errors; two involved errors concerning the suspension of anticoagulant drugs prior to surgery and four implied antihypertensive drugs. Once, it was necessary to contact the surgeon. In this case, the surgeon decided to continue with the surgery as schedule. Fifty-seven medications suffered a change in the period between the anaesthestic visit and the surgery, nine of them belonged to the monitored medication group. 

What next?

The next steps are to spread the flow chart to other patients, to distribute the protocol among hospital healthcare professionals and to implement a procedure for the reintroduction of the modified medication.

Pdf

Author(s)

Ane Hornbaek Mortensen

Why was it done?

Previously, a quarterly report showing adherence to national treatment guidelines was issued to all hospital administrations in our region. It was their responsibility to forward this to the appropriate specialists/consultants. This often failed and even when it was done, our experience showed that it wasn’t read by the consultants. Consequently, prescription patterns didn’t change despite the report highlighting the wards that weren’t complying with the national treatment guidelines.

What was done?

Short newsletters including graphs/tables showing the ward’s degree of adherence to national treatment guidelines were emailed to the chief consultant of the specific ward.

How was it done?

In our region a 6-person analytical team, which includes 3 hospital pharmacists, monitors adherence to national treatment guidelines issued by our national council for the use of expensive hospital medicines (RADS). Based on the results, the analytical team decides which newsletters to write. The hospital pharmacists in the analytical team are responsible for writing the newsletters and emailing them direct to the relevant specialist/consultant.

What has been achieved?

It seems as if the introduction of more targeted information has led to more rapidly changing prescription patterns. One example is oral iron chelating agents to hematological patients where a RADS guideline was issued recommending that all new patients should receive deferipron instead of deferasirox. This information was initially issued through the usual channels (via hospital administration) but no change in the use of deferipron/deferasirox was seen. This only happened after emailing a newsletter directly to the chief consultants of the three hematology wards in our region, showing the current use of deferipron/deferasirox and the potential cost reduction. Nine months and three newsletters later the percentage of deferipron use on the hematology wards increased from 2% to 27%, leading to a 22% cost reduction. Target was 25% deferipron (the guideline only covered new patients). The total increase in the percentage of deferipron use on hospitals in our region was 351% compared to an increase of between 0 and 19% in the other four national regions.

What next?

Continued and increased use of targeted communication in the health care system is required to ensure that specific information reaches the relevant players.

Pdf

Author(s)

Susanna Saano, Tiina Koskinen, Hillevi Rautiainen, Minna Taam-Ukkonen

Pdf

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.