Implementation and follow-up of an Assisted Electronic Prescription Program
European Statement
Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
Author(s)
Juan Campillo, Manuel Bonete, Marta Zayas, Maria Molina, Laura Barrajón, Cristina Martínez, Ángela Rizo, Maria Ángeles Bernabeu, Maria Teresa Aznar
Why was it done?
Medication errors (ME) occur in different phases of the drug circuit: prescription (16%), transcription (27%), validation, preparation, dispensing (48%) and administration (9%). The AEP is a tool to guarantee the safety of this circuit, being able to avoid up to 65% of ME. There is also a learning curve in new users of an AEP, confirming the need for support to reduce ME.
What was done?
1-Maintenance of the Assisted Electronic Prescription Program (AEP)
2-Implementation in 11 wards and in the Emergency Department of a 396-bed tertiary hospital
3-Training
4-To set a pilot AEP
5-Reeducation strategies
How was it done?
1- 1465 drugs included in the Pharmacotherapeutic Guide were configured. 3 levels of danger were created for Hazardous Drugs (HD) and the recommendations for their preparation / administration were agreed upon. The Therapeutic Exchange Guide was integrated into 443 drugs (761 exchange proposals).
2- It started in the Emergency Department and every week a new ward with AEP was opened.Paper was eliminated throughout the circuit, drug dispensing trolleys were modified and a computer was fitted to record administrations at the bedside.114 pharmacotherapeutic protocols were created.
3- A technical training program, changes in procedures, schedules and training documents were designed. 72 sessions were given to 346 physicians and 88 sessions to 543 nurses.
4- 490 incidents were reported, prioritizing the most urgent (compromising patient safety). 224 claims to expedite resolutions. We also collaborated with other hospitals.
5- Welcome plan to train new staff and annual sessions. A tutorial video to focus on the points that caused the most errors was recorded. Preparation of new documents to report the changes.
What has been achieved?
First hospital to implement computerized administration. Elimination of transcription errors. Improved administration security. Greater visibility of the pharmacist and participation in decision-making. Contribution to development of the AEP and its implementation in 15 more hospitals.
What next?
Monitoring the necessary interventions to develop educational strategies when a growing trend is observed. Improve the welcome plan. Continue piloting the new AEP versions Follow the evolution of pending incidents. Evaluate the impact of the educational strategy of the tutorial video.
Do we provide patients with sufficient information for the safe use of thermolabile medicines?
European Statement
Clinical Pharmacy Services
Author(s)
Miguel Angel Carvajal-Sanchez, Josefa Leon-Villar, Pilar Pacheco-Lopez, Javier Ibañez-Caturla, Paula Torrano-Belmonte, Lydia Fructuoso-Gonzalez, Juan Antonio Gutierrez-Sanchez, Maria Hernandez-Sanchez
Why was it done?
In recent years, we have witnessed a significant increase in the number of thermolabile pharmaceutical specialities, which makes it necessary to keep strict control of the storage temperature from manufacture to administration.
In this context, patient education is a fundamental step in ensuring that these medicines are administered effectively and safely.
What was done?
A study was carried out to determine the quality of the information provided by Hospital Pharmacy Service (HPS) professionals to patients regarding the storage of thermolabile medicines (TM) at home.
After analysing the variability of the results, we established in a protocolised manner the necessary and sufficient information items to be included in the pharmaceutical advice to patients regarding the storage of this type of medicines.
How was it done?
A random selection of 28 HPS professionals (13 nurses, 10 specialist pharmacists and 5 resident pharmacists) was made. Each participant, in isolation and individually, made a selection of criteria to be contained in the patient information regarding the transport and storage of TM.
The results obtained were:
General information:
o Informing that it is a TM: 89.28%.
o Telephone number for incidents: 10.71%.
o Keep out of the reach of children: 3.57%.
o Return if discontinuation of treatment: 3.57%.
Storage:
o Specify location in refrigerator: door/indoor distinction 28.57%; Avoid contact with walls: 28.57%; specific place in refrigerator 3.57%.
o Do not store next to food: 17.85%.
o Refrigerator/freezer distinction: 10.71%.
Transport:
o Recommendations for correct transport: 50%.
o Time elapsed from dispensing to refrigerator storage: 39.29%.
Administration:
o Tempering prior to administration (when necessary): 39.28%.
o Visual inspection: 7.14%.
o Check expiry date: 7.14%.
o Frecuency of administration: 3.57%.
What has been achieved?
Completion, standardisation and systematisation of the provision of information to patients on TM.
What next?
Training sessions will be given to all HPS professionals involved, including new recruits and pharmacy assistants. This is an initiative applicable to all HPS.
Securing the care pathway of patients in the new experimentation of medical cannabis through pharmaceutical interviews
European Statement
Clinical Pharmacy Services
Author(s)
Marie Guedon, Maëliss Laurent, Thibault Vallecillo, Catherine Mennesson, Mélanie Jennesson Lyver, Dominique Hettler, Céline Mongaret
Why was it done?
In March 2021, the “Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament” initiated an experiment to evaluate the relevance and feasibility of the availability of MC as a narcotic drug, in France. In our hospital, we included children to treat drug-resistant epilepsy, and performed a dispensing process to secure the patient care pathway and strengthen collaboration between hospital pharmacists and primary care professional.
What was done?
The aim of this study is to secure the care pathway of patients included in a national experimentation of medical cannabis (MC) by developing pharmaceutical interviews. Thus, to optimize the continuity of patient care, a pharmaceutical report was developed, and addressed to the community pharmacists of the patient.
How was it done?
A working group was created including clinical pharmacists, a neuropediatrician and a coordination nurse. During medical consultations, pharmaceutical interviews were conducted and led to pharmaceutic reports, sent to the community pharmacies of the patients. In order to evaluate this report, a satisfaction survey was carried out.
What has been achieved?
During the first six months of the experimentation, three children were included. The clinical pharmacist team (two senior pharmacists and two pharmacy residents) performed ten dispensing processes. During the eight pharmaceutical interviews, four pharmaceutical interventions were performed. Firstly, the interaction between clobazam and MC (noticed in one patient) required a dosage adjustment. Then, the association between MC and hepatotoxic drugs (found in two patients) requires hepatic monitoring. A pharmacovigilance statement was also drafted to report side effects (digestive disorders). The satisfaction survey of community pharmacists showed that the transmitted information, mostly related to the medication review, was considered as useful for the community pharmacies of the patients. This data helped to guide the pharmaceutical interviews during their dispensing process.
What next?
Pharmaceutical interviews and their reports lead to secure the patient care pathway and improve the communication amongst health care professionals. Those measures provide an optimal case management and avoid therapeutic breakdown. Nevertheless, difficulties have been reported, mostly due to delay in the supply chain of the community pharmacies. Therefore, this system requires some adjustments before it can be applied on a larger scale. One of the suggestions is a provisional calendar of consultations and dispensations.
Medical supply vending machines – a direct-to-patient distribution method that offers flexibility to outpatients
European Statement
Selection, Procurement and Distribution
Author(s)
Louise Refsgaard, Linda Skovsted, Nina Bøggild
Why was it done?
The medical supply vending machines were implemented during 2021 as a way of direct-to-patient distribution of medicine with more flexibility. The aim was to offer 24-hour access to collect medicine at a location that suits the patient, e.g. close to the patient’s home.
What was done?
Medical supply vending machines were implemented in the Capital Region of Denmark. The vending machines allow patients to collect their medicine whenever and wherever it suits them. It is the patient’s healthcare professional that controls and orders the medicine. The hospital pharmacy staff consults the prescription and labels, dispenses and records the medicine and places it in the vending machine for collection.
Patient and staff satisfaction was surveyed.
How was it done?
The implementation of this new direct-to-patient distribution method was carried out by the Capital Region Hospital Pharmacy in close collaboration with the region’s hospitals and outpatient departments. Installing the machines was fast but a full implementation requires that the clinical staff rethink their practice and accept that dispensing is no longer their responsibility. This has been the biggest obstacle along with creating patient safe procedures.
What has been achieved?
7 medical supply vending machines were installed centrally in hospitals in the Capital Region of Denmark. The machines are now used to distribute medicine to some of the region’s outpatients.
The patient satisfaction survey showed that the patients are very satisfied with the vending machines: 100 % are either ‘highly satisfied’ (86 %) or ‘satisfied’ (14 %) with the new service, and 97 % would like to use it again. The staff was also satisfied with the new service.
Additionally, the quality of medicine dispensing is increased due to hospital pharmacy staff dispensing the medicine rather than nurses.
What next?
In order to offer flexibility to patients and increase the quality of dispensing of medicine, we aim to increase the number of patients that collect their medicine from the vending machines by using the current machines in their full capacity and installing more machines. We also aim to collaborate with Denmark’s other 4 regions, so that patients, who are treated outside their home region, can collect their medicine in a vending machine closer to their home.
Renewal in pharmaceutical compounding sterile preparations circuit in Pharmacy Service
European Statement
Production and Compounding
Author(s)
PILAR RANZ ORTEGA, MARÍA ARRIETA LOITEGUI, DANIEL GONZALEZ ANDRES, ANA MARÍA AGUI CALLEJAS, MARIA TERESA POZAS DEL RIO
Why was it done?
– Optimize the workflow:Nursing staff are independent in final product quality control.Dissapear the manual register of compounding sterile preparations.Fewer mixtures are discarded.Also in Pharmacy Service only elaborate the sterile preparations with an economic and safety impact.
– Improve the safety of drug administration in pediatric patients: there are ready-to-use commercial parenteral presentations, which can lead to errors when dosing per kilo,fe: enoxaparin…
– Optimize economic savings:all excess vials are reused
What was done?
Previously,some parenteral drugs were compounded at Pharmacy Service.The rest of the vials were discarded daily,so the pharmacist had to anticipated some elaborations not to throw,so then some were suspended.
Also, the pharmacists done the final product quality control,it could be delayed the dispensing and specially when it´s necessary to repeat the mixture.
The changes were:
– Re-selection of the parenteral drugs compounded at Pharmacy Service by:
• Economic criterio:the cost of drug has to be >20 euros/vial
• Safety for the pediatric patient:redose individually parenteral drugs “readytouse”
– Review the storage conditions:physicochemical (technical data sheet drug,Stabilis web) and microbiological stability (Good practices for preparation drugs in hospital pharmacy services publised by Spain Goverment) of all parenteral drugs previously selected.Although the physicochemical stability is higher,the final stability will be limited by the microbiological stability and the risk level microbial contamination(USP 2004).
– Standard Operating Procedures with structured and updated information
– Reuse of partially used multi dose vials:we reviewed the physicochemical and microbiological stability of open vial
– Final product quality control by nursing staff
– Save time to pharmacist:daily scheduling instead of anticipated elaboration of sterile preparations
How was it done?
– A nurse involved in the circuit change giving her feedback on the changes
– Traceability of the rests of the vials:stickers are affixed to the opened vials indicating the reconstitution data and the expiration date
– Final product quality control should be done by a diferente nurse to elaborated to detect potencial errors
What has been achieved?
The total cost savings for this year is 295.778€. After the circuit´s change, the savings have increased by 55% for liposomal amphotericin b, 51% defibrotide, 24% micafungin.
What next?
Compounding sterile preparations individualized in Pharmacy Service to patients hospitalized at home, transplanted of hematopoietic progenitors and immunocompromised
Assessing the Application of Essential Medication Errors Prevention Strategies in Healthcare Institutes: STOP Medication Error Project
European Statement
Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
Author(s)
Monira Alwhaibi
Why was it done?
This study is the first project of the STOP ME projects which aims to develop a tool that can assess the application of the essential strategies that can stop or minimize MEs in healthcare institutes in Saudi Arabia. Consequently, stakeholders in the healthcare system can identify current gaps that need feature improvement to enhance patient safety
What was done?
Medication Errors (ME) are defined as unintentional drug-induced harm that led to morbidity and mortality. The STOP (ME) project is a comprehensive series of research studies that aim to explore MEs in Saudi Arabia and how to stop such harmful events.
How was it done?
Extensive search of the literature review for the essential strategies to stop or minimize MEs was carried by the research team to develop a draft of the aimed tool. The survey tool was sent in round 1 to the Delphi experts’ panel for review. Based on received recommendations, the tool was updated and sent for round 2 review and consensus. The developed tool was then piloted to test the practicability of the tool before running the survey on large sample size (second project). The study was approved by the King Saud University Medical Centre IRB ethics committee [20/0153/IRB].
What has been achieved?
After using the Delphi technique two major changes happened to the survey. 1) Section A was removed (high alert medications). 2) A new section was added (ISMP publications) with some minor changes. Launching a pilot survey on thirty healthcare practitioners (physicians n=11, pharmacists n=10, nurses n=9) resulted in further minor changes by adding two new columns. The final tool was a survey consists of six sections including Demographics, Prescription, Dispensing, Administration, Monitoring and Quality, and Targeted Medication Safety Best Practices for Hospitals. All combined 86 questions with the determined time to answer the survey is in the range of 25-30 minutes. Overall feedback of the pilot survey was good.
What next?
This initiative “STOP ME” will have a significant impact in the field of medication safety research and will build awareness among institutes in Saudi Arabia that are lacking important strategies that prevent MEs
IMPROVING HIGH-RISK DRUG PRACTICES IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH
European Statement
Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
Why was it done?
Review of the 2019 Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA) Medication Safety Monitoring Programme, and in-house Emergency Department (ED) medication variances review identified that risk reduction strategies for specific high-risk drugs and high-risk situations were required.
What was done?
A multidisciplinary team reviewed and implemented initiatives to improve medication safety practices for procedural sedation, emergency tray drugs and ketamine use in emergency settings was undertaken.
How was it done?
• Multidisciplinary teams (MDT) of key stakeholders were formed to review each high-risk drug / practice requiring improvement.
• The MDT developed the required procedures and policies that were further reviewed and approved by the relevant hospital committees.
• The MDT supported roll out of the improvement initiatives through communication, staff education and process review.
What has been achieved?
• A hospital wide procedural sedation policy and patient information leaflet was developed. Competencies for staff that perform procedural sedation have been identified. A specific procedural sedation incident report form has been piloted. A poster detailing the process for sedation reversal is in development.
• Emergency tray drug preparation, storage and use has been standardised across all hospital settings, including the introduction of dedicated emergency drug bags. The bags enable prompt drug retrieval during emergencies and supports safe storage, documentation and disposal of used /unused emergency drugs.
• A protocol for ED use of ketamine was developed. The protocol supports safe use of ketamine for specific emergency indications for which there is little published information, e.g. procedural sedation, analgesia and agitation.
• The initiatives were implemented and included in ED simulation training.
What next?
The described medication safety initiatives have considered the practice challenges for high risk drug access and use in emergency settings. The initiatives have standardised processes for specific high-risk drugs, supporting safer use. MDT collaboration ensured early and ongoing staff engagement from applicable disciplines, facilitating implementation and practice changes. Evaluation of the initiatives in practice is currently under review. The initiatives and learnings are transferrable to other emergency clinical settings.
Elaboration of a Good Practice Guide for the administration of parenteral antibiotics at children’s hospital
European Statement
Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
Author(s)
MOHAMMED ADNANE EL WARTITI, WAFAA ENNEFFAH, BOUCHRA MEDDAH, MUSTAPHA BOUATIA
Why was it done?
The GPG was developed in a concern of practices standardization to guarantee the safety and efficacy of parenteral antibiotics, especially those stored in vials which reuse in possible only if conditions of administration and stability are respected.
What was done?
We developed a Good Practice Guide (GPG) for the usage of major available parenteral antibiotics.
How was it done?
After we listed all parenteral antibiotics available at the hospital pharmacy, we selected the most used ones and we synthesized all manufacturers’ data to establish a GPG for their administration. We also used literature data to complete missing information in “Summaries of Product Characteristics” related to pediatric use of these drugs. Finally we determined the most antibiotics consuming units according to their defined daily doses, where GPG recommendations will be implemented, before their extension to all other units.
What has been achieved?
The GPG concerned the most used antibiotics, which mainly belong to the following classes: Beta-lactam, Glycopeptide and Imidazole antibiotics, Aminoglycosides and Quinolones. It specifies the galenical presentation, used solvents, volume and duration of administration, stability after reconstitution as well as incompatibilities and special measures relating to the use of these drugs. The most antibiotics consuming units are pediatric intensive care units, “IIB” pediatric unit and pediatric surgical emergency department.
What next?
The approach used in this work can be adopted in other similar structures in order to establish GPGs within the framework of a quality control policy aiming to raise the standard of care.
Drone delivery of prescription medicines: contact-free, direct-to-consumer shipment reduces risk of Covid-19 infection for vulnerable populations
European Statement
Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
Author(s)
Jon Michaeli, Bryan Li
Why was it done?
The novel delivery method provides an on-demand option for senior citizens at higher risk of serious Covid-19 infections to receive health essentials while maintaining social distancing. The program launched before Covid-19 vaccines were publicly available, and was sustained during a period of especially intense Covid-19 spread in the US from Nov 2020 – Jan 2021.
What was done?
In early May 2020, Matternet, CVS, and UPS launched direct-to-consumer drone delivery of prescription medicines and other health goods to The Villages, the United States’s largest retirement community with more than 135,000 residents. The operations have expanded in scope since and are ongoing
How was it done?
The drone flights were conducted by Matternet’s M2V9 UAV platform and drew upon the companies’ experience operating other US healthcare drone networks. Deliveries are dispatched from CVS store 8381 and flown to New Covenant United Methodist Church, with final delivery to front porches via golf cart. This is an important milestone on the journey to drone delivery to individual homes at scale.
What has been achieved?
Matternet and UPS have completed 2,500+ deliveries to date. The partnership has expanded operations to Elan Buena Vista, another retirement community nearby. The program’s success helped pave the way for other healthcare drone programs, including a new route at Wake Forest Baptist where Matternet and UPS are transporting Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccines (first ever in the US).
What next?
Full automation achieved via Matternet’s proprietary drone port, the “Station,” will permit pharmaceutical drone delivery at scale and accelerate the roll-out of city-wide networks that give pharmacists more flexibility around where and how patients receive medicines. These networks will support and accelerate the shift to tele-health and “hospital at home” as well as just-in-time inventory management, with significant potential to reduce medical waste through stock centralization. First commercial deployment of the Station occurred in Lugano, Switzerland in September 2021. The same month, Matternet announced a partnership with the Abu Dhabi Department of Health and the UAE’s General Civil Aviation Authority to launch a city-wide medical network serving 40+ locations by 2023. Similar systems are planned for Europe, in cities such as Zurich, Berlin and Athens.
ANTICHOLINERGIC MEDICATION IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS
European Statement
Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
Author(s)
SILVIA CORNEJO-UIXEDA, M JOSE MARTINEZ-PASCUAL
Why was it done?
The anticholinergic burden is the cumulative effect of concomitantly taking multiple drugs with anticholinergic properties. It estimates the risk of suffering anticholinergic adverse effects. Anticholinergic scales are lists that rank the anticholinergic potential of drugs into categories.
What was done?
Our aim is to know the use of drugs with anticholinergic effect (ACD) in a regional hospital.
How was it done?
Observational study in patients older than 70 years admitted to a regional hospital from January to September 2021. We reviewed the medication of the patients looking for ACD. Then, we calculated anticholinergic burden with the “Drug Burden Index” available in: http://www.anticholinergicscales.es/calculate. The variables collected were: age, gender, number of drugs with anticholinergic effect, if ACD were prescribed before hospitalization, readmission, anticholinergic burden, risk of suffering anticholinergic effect and anticholinergic symptoms.
What has been achieved?
average 81 years (70-100), 102 (56% woman), 46 (25%) did not have any ACD. 58 patients had 1 ACD, 56 patients 2 ACD, 12 patients 3 ACD, 8 patients 4 ACD, 2 patients 5 ACD. Of patients with ACD, anticholinergic burden average was 0.98 in surgical patients (medium risk) and 1 in medical patients (elevated risk). 68 patients had medium risk and 68 patients elevated risk. We found constipation in 17 patients, somnolence in 6 patients, and disorientation in 2 patients. ACD used were the following (surgical vs. medical patients): Antidepressants: 3 vs.10, benzodiazepines: 28 vs. 33, opioids: 17 vs. 27, antiemetics: 13 3 vs. 38, Antipsychotics: 4 3 vs. 49, antihistamines: 2 vs. 2, antiepileptic: 0 vs 9, other: 0 vs. 3.
56 patients (31%) were prescribed the same ACD that they took before hospitalization. Only 17 patients were readmitted in hospital in less than a month.
We just made 2 interventions. We proposed to lower the dose in one case. In another, we proposed give metoclopramide just if necessary.
What next?
Most of hospitalized patients have ACD prescribed. Half of them had a high risk. However, just a few had anticholinergic reactions. This could be explained because we only had the information of electronic history and maybe some of them were not collected.