Assessment of ePrescription quality: an observational study at three mail-order pharmacies

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The introduction of electronic transfer of prescriptions (ETP) or ePrescriptions in ambulatory health care has been suggested to have a positive impact on the prescribing and dispensing processes. Thereby, implying that ePrescribing can improve safety, quality, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness. In December 2007, 68% of all new prescriptions were transferred electronically in Sweden. The aim of the present study was to assess the quality of ePrescriptions by comparing the proportions of ePrescriptions and non-electronic prescriptions necessitating a clarification contact (correction, completion or change) with the prescriber at the time of dispensing.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A direct observational study was performed at three Swedish mail-order pharmacies which were known to dispense a large proportion of ePrescriptions (38–75%). Data were gathered on all ePrescriptions dispensed at these pharmacies over a three week period in February 2006. All clarification contacts with prescribers were included in the study and were classified and assessed in comparison with all drug prescriptions dispensed at the same pharmacies over the specified period.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 31225 prescriptions dispensed during the study period, clarification contacts were made for 2.0% (147/7532) of new ePrescriptions and 1.2% (79/6833) of new non-electronic prescriptions. This represented a relative risk (RR) of 1.7 (95% CI 1.3–2.2) for new ePrescriptions compared to new non-electronic prescriptions. The increased RR was mainly due to 'Dosage and directions for use', which had an RR of 7.6 (95% CI 2.8–20.4) when compared to other clarification contacts. In all, 89.5% of the suggested pharmacist interventions were accepted by the prescriber, 77.7% (192/247) as suggested and an additional 11.7% (29/247) after a modification during contact with the prescriber.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The increased proportion of prescriptions necessitating a clarification contact for new ePrescriptions compared to new non-electronic prescriptions indicates the need for an increased focus on quality aspects in ePrescribing deployment. ETP technology should be developed towards a two-way communication between the prescriber and the pharmacist with automated checks of missing, inaccurate, or ambiguous information. This would enhance safety and quality for the patient and also improve efficiency and cost-effectiveness within the health care system.</p

External validation and adaptation of a dynamic prediction model for patients with high‐grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma

Background and Objectives: A dynamic prediction model for patients with soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities was previously developed to predict updated overall survival probabilities throughout patient follow‐up. This study updates and externally validates the dynamic model. Methods: Data from 3826 patients with high‐grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma, treated surgically with curative intent were used to update the dynamic PERsonalised SARcoma Care (PERSARC) model. Patients were added to the model development cohort and grade was included in the model. External validation was performed with data from 1111 patients treated at a single tertiary center. Results: Calibration plots show good model calibration. Dynamic C‐indices suggest that the model can discriminate between high‐ and low‐risk patients. The dynamic C‐indices at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years after surgery were equal to 0.697, 0.790, 0.822, 0.818, 0.812, and 0.827, respectively. Conclusion: Results from the external validation show that the dynamic PERSARC model is reliable in predicting the probability of surviving an additional 5 years from a specific prediction time point during follow‐up. The model combines patient‐, treatment‐specific and time‐dependent variables such as local recurrence and distant metastasis to provide accurate survival predictions throughout follow‐up and is available through the PERSARC app.Peer reviewe

Age-related differences of oncological outcomes in primary extremity soft tissue sarcoma: a multistate model including 6260 patients

Purpose: No studies extensively compared the young adults (YA, 18-39 years), middle-aged (40-69 years), and elderly (≥70 years) population with primary high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma (eSTS). This study aimed to determine whether the known effect of age on overall survival (OS) and disease progression can be explained by differences in tumour characteristics and treatment protocol among the YA, middle-aged and elderly population in patients with primary high-grade eSTS treated with curative intent. Methods: In this retrospective multicentre study, inclusion criteria were patients with primary high-grade eSTS of 18 years and older, surgically treated with curative intent between 2000 and 2016. Cox proportional hazard models and a multistate model were used to determine the association of age on OS and disease progression. Results: A total of 6260 patients were included in this study. YA presented more often after 'whoops'-surgery or for reresection due to residual disease, and with more deep-seated tumours. Elderly patients presented more often with grade III and larger (≥10 cm) tumours. After adjustment for the imbalance in tumour and treatment characteristics the hazard ratio for OS of the middle-aged population is 1.47 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.23-1.76) and 3.13 (95% CI: 2.59-3.78) in the elderly population, compared with YA. Discussion: The effect of age on OS could only partially be explained by the imbalance in the tumour characteristics and treatment variables. The threefold higher risk of elderly could, at least partially, be explained by a higher other-cause mortality. The results might also be explained by a different tumour behaviour or suboptimal treatment in elderly compared with the younger population. Keywords: Adolescents and young adults; Elderly; Extremities; Metastasis; Middle-aged; Recurrence; Soft tissue sarcoma; Survival.Peer reviewe