Search

Abstract: Rationale, aims, and objectives: Whilst many dose omissions cause no patient harm, inappropriate dose omissions have been associated with increased length of hospital stay, risk of sepsis, and mortality. This study aimed to comprehensively describe the prevalence and nature of omitted doses overall and of high risk medication dose omissions in an organization using an electronic Medication Management System. Methods: A retrospective cross‐sectional study was undertaken in an Australian tertiary referral health service. All routinely documented electronic inpatient dose administration records from 1st July 2014 to 30th June 2015 were included. Period prevalence and characteristics of dose omissions overall and of high‐risk medication dose omissions were determined. Results: During the study period, 3.3 million inpatient doses were scheduled for administration, with doses endorsed as “not given” comprising 6.2% of all scheduled doses. Non‐valid dose omissions (medication not available or no justification documented) comprised 1.2% of scheduled doses. Patient refusal accounted for one third of all dose omissions, while for 12% no explanation was provided and 7% were endorsed “medication not available”. High‐risk medications accounted for 20% of all dose omissions. One in 20 antimicrobial doses scheduled were omitted, and of these, 17% were due to patient refusal. Conclusion: The period prevalence of dose omissions in this large study after electronic Medication Management System implementation is similar to that found when paper charts were used. Although most dose omissions appear appropriate, many orders were not given due to patient refusal or with no documented justification. Interventions to minimize unintentional dose omissions are indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale, aims and objectives Inpatient bed access decreases when ward discharge is delayed. This contributes to prolonged emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) which has been associated with increased hospital LOS and mortality. Delays in preparation of discharge medication prescriptions by ward doctors may contribute to delayed ward discharge. This project aimed to evaluate the effect on patient flow of having a pharmacist collaborate with ward doctors to prepare discharge prescriptions at a hospital with an electronic prescribing system. Method Eight-week pre- and post-intervention study on two surgical wards at a major metropolitan Australian hospital. During the intervention, a project pharmacist (PP) electronically prepared discharge prescriptions, in consultation with ward doctors, which were reviewed by the regular ward pharmacist before being dispensed. Outcome measures, based on hospital performance indicators, included: * Percentage of patients transferred to wards from ED within four and six hours of presentation; * Median time (minutes) past 9 am that patients were discharged from the wards; * Percentage of patients discharged from wards by 9 am; * Staff satisfaction. Results Pre- and post-intervention, there were 259 and 246 patients transferred from ED to the study wards, respectively. The percentage of patients transferred within four and six hours of presentation did not change. There were 320 and 341 patients discharged, pre- and post-intervention, respectively, who required a discharge prescription. The PP prepared 273 (80%) prescriptions during the post-intervention period. Patients were discharged 57 minutes earlier with the intervention (median 211 vs. 154 minutes past 9 am, P = 0.01). The percentage of patients discharged before 9 am increased from 6% to 12% (P = 0.01). All 26 health-professional respondents (79% response rate) were satisfied with the service and recommended its continuation. Conclusions Pharmacist collaboration with doctors to prepare discharge prescriptions did not impact upon ED access targets, but resulted in patients being discharged earlier. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]