RESUMEN
Background Low quality of medication information in discharge summaries from hospitals may jeopardize optimal therapy and put the patient at risk for medication errors and adverse drug events. Objective To audit the quality of medication information in discharge summaries and explore factors associated with the quality. Setting Helgelandssykehuset Mo i Rana, a rural hospital in central Norway. Method For each month in 2013, we randomly selected 60 discharge summaries from the Department of Medicine and Surgery (totally 720) and evaluated the medication information using eight Norwegian quality criteria. Main outcome measure Mean score per discharge summary ranging from 0 (lowest quality) to 16 (highest quality). Results Mean score per discharge summary was 7.4 (SD 2.8; range 0-14), significantly higher when evaluating medications used regularly compared to mediations used as needed (7.80 vs. 6.52; p < 0.001). Lowest score was achieved for quality criteria concerning generic names, indications for medication use, reasons why changes had been made and information about the source for information. Factors associated with increased quality scores are increasing numbers of medications and male patients. Increasing age seemed to be associated with a reduced score, while type of department was not associated with the quality. Conclusion In discharge summaries from 2013, we identified a low quality of medication information in accordance with the Norwegian quality criteria. Actions for improvement are necessary and follow-up studies to monitor quality are needed.
Asunto(s)
Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Resumen del Alta del Paciente/normas , Garantía de la Calidad de Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores SexualesRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To study differences in outcomes of medication reconciliation (MR) when performed by clinical pharmacists compared to nurses. METHODS: 201 patients (21-92 years) admitted to the Department of Cardiology at the University Hospital of North Norway, autumn 2012, were randomized into a pharmacist group (PG) and a nurse group (NG). The nurses and the pharmacists were trained for performing the MR process by an independent clinical pharmacist. Medication discrepancies (MDs) were discussed with the physicians. Time spent during the MR was recorded. An independent expert group rated clinical relevance of the MDs retrospectively. RESULTS: At least one MD was identified in 78 % and 84 % of patients in PG and NG, respectively (P = 0.269) with a mean number of MDs per patient 3.1 (SD 2.1) and 2.8 (SD 2.2), respectively (P = 0.528). Mean time spent/patient on the MR process was 22.9 min (SD 11.6) in the PG and 32.2 min (SD 20.3) in the NG (P < 0,001). Physicians agreed significantly more often to act upon the MDs presented by pharmacists compared to nurses (P = 0.001). The expert group finally assessed 48 % and 49 % of the MDs to be of the clinical relevance in the PG and the NG, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: By applying a structured method for MR, a small however not statistically significant difference in identified MDs between nurses and clinical pharmacists was revealed. The pharmacists spent significantly less time than the nurses, and physicians agreed significantly more often with the pharmacist that action should be taken on the MDs. This is important in the discussion of who to perform MR.