Medication errors in the outpatient and ambulatory settings: an evidence synthesis approach

Background: Medication errors are preventable incidents that may occur at any stage of the medication use process. Despite their potential to cause severe harm, they are common in healthcare settings. Outpatient and ambulatory settings are known to enhance patient access to healthcare and promote continuity of care. Medication therapy remain key interventions offered in these settings. Currently, there is a dearth of literature on the prevalence and contributory factors to medication errors in the outpatient setting. The program of work presented in this thesis firstly, through the use of an umbrella review, aims to systematically evaluate the contributory factors to medication errors in healthcare settings in terms of the nature of these factors; methodologies and theories used to classify them; and terminologies and definitions used to describe them. The second phase of the thesis aims to synthesize the literature on the prevalence, nature, contributory factors, and interventions to minimize medication errors in outpatient and ambulatory settings using a systematic review of research literature. Methods: In the first phase, an umbrella review was conducted. Systematic reviews were searched using Medline, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, and Google Scholar from inception to March 2022. The data extraction form was informed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) manual and critical appraisal was conducted using the JBI quality assessment tool. A narrative approach to data synthesis was adopted. In the second phase, a systematic review was conducted. Literature was searched using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar from 2011 to November 2021. Quality assessment was conducted using the quality assessment checklist for prevalence studies tool. Data related to contributory factors were synthesized according to Reason’s Accident Causation Model. Results: Twenty-seven systematic reviews were included, most of which focused on a specific healthcare setting or clinical area. Decision-making mistakes such as non-consideration for patient risk factors most commonly led to error, followed by organizational and environmental factors (e.g. understaffing and distractions). Only ten studies used a prespecified methodology to classify contributory factors, among which the use of theory, specifically Reason’s theory was most common. None of the reviews evaluated the effectiveness of interventions in preventing errors. Twenty-four articles were included in the systematic review. Medication errors were common in outpatient and ambulatory settings. A wide range of prevalence of prescribing errors and dosing errors was reported with errors ranging from 0-91% and 0-41% respectively of all medications prescribed. Latent conditions largely due to inadequate knowledge were common contributory factors followed by active failures. The seven studies that described the use of interventions were of poor quality. Conclusion: The findings of this program of work provides a comprehensive list of contributory factors to medication errors in healthcare settings. It also emphasizes on the need for consistent use of terminology and methodology in researching contributory factors. The systematic review reports the prevalence and contributory factors to errors in outpatient setting. This thesis overall, emphasizes the need for multifactorial theory-based interventions that incorporate system-level strategies, pharmacists, technology, and education to minimize medication errors in all healthcare settings

Prevalence, contributing factors, and interventions to reduce medication errors in outpatient and ambulatory settings:a systematic review

Background Medication errors are common events that compromise patient safety. Outpatient and ambulatory settings enhance access to healthcare which has been linked to favorable outcomes. While medication errors have been extensively researched in inpatient settings, there is dearth of literature from outpatient settings. Aim To synthesize the peer-reviewed literature on the prevalence, nature, contributory factors, and interventions to minimize medication errors in outpatient and ambulatory settings. Method A systematic review was conducted using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar which were searched from 2011 to November 2021. Quality assessment was conducted using the quality assessment checklist for prevalence studies tool. Data related to contributory factors were synthesized according to Reason’s accident causation model. Results Twenty-four articles were included in the review. Medication errors were common in outpatient and ambulatory settings (23–92% of prescribed drugs). Prescribing errors were the most common type of errors reported (up to 91% of the prescribed drugs, high variations in the data), with dosing errors being most prevalent (up to 41% of the prescribed drugs). Latent conditions, largely due to inadequate knowledge, were common contributory factors followed by active failures. The seven studies that discussed interventions were of poor quality and none used a randomized design. Conclusion Medication errors (particularly prescribing errors and dosing errors) in outpatient settings are prevalent, although reported prevalence range is wide. Future research should be informed by behavioral theories and should use high quality designs. These interventions should encompass system-level strategies, multidisciplinary collaborations, effective integration of pharmacists, health information technology, and educational programs.MP was supported by the NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre at the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Birmingham.Scopu

An umbrella review of systematic reviews on contributory factors to medication errors in health-care settings

Introduction: Medication errors are common events that compromise patient safety and are prevalent in all health-care settings. This umbrella review aims to systematically evaluate the evidence on contributory factors to medication errors in health-care settings in terms of the nature of these factors, methodologies and theories used to identify and classify them, and the terminologies and definitions used to describe them. Areas covered: Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to March 2022. The data extraction form was derived from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Reviewers’ Manual, and critical appraisal was conducted using the JBI quality assessment tool. A narrative approach to data synthesis was adopted. Expert opinion: Twenty-seven systematic reviews were included, most of which focused on a specific health-care setting or clinical area. Decision-making mistakes such as non-consideration of patient risk factors most commonly led to error, followed by organizational and environmental factors (e.g. understaffing and distractions). Only 10 studies had a pre-specified methodology to classify contributory factors, among which the use of theory, specifically Reason’s theory was commonly used. None of the reviews evaluated the effectiveness of interventions in preventing errors. The collated contributory factors identified in this umbrella review can inform holistic theory-based intervention development

Application of behavioural theories, models, and frameworks in pharmacy practice research based on published evidence: a scoping review.

Pharmacy practice research often focuses on the design, implementation and evaluation of pharmacy services and interventions. The use of behavioural theory in intervention research allows understanding of interventions’ mechanisms of action and are more likely to result in effective and sustained interventions. To collate, summarise and categorise the reported behavioural frameworks, models and theories used in pharmacy practice research. PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and EBSCO (CINAHL PLUS, British Education index, ERIC) were systematically searched to capture all pharmacy practice articles that had reported the use of behavioural frameworks, theories, or models since inception of the database. Results were filtered to include articles published in English in pharmacy practice journals. Full-text screening and data extraction were independently performed by two reviewers. A narrative synthesis of the data was adopted. Studies were reviewed for alignment to the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) framework to identify in which phase(s) of the research that the theory/model/framework had been employed. Fifty articles met the inclusion criteria; a trend indicating an increasing frequency of behavioural theory/frameworks/models within pharmacy practice research was identified; the most frequently reported were Theory of Planned Behaviour and Theoretical Domains Framework. Few studies provided explicit and comprehensive justification for adopting a specific theory/model/framework and description of how it underpinned the research was lacking. The majority were investigations exploring determinants of behaviours, or facilitators and barriers to implementing or delivering a wide range of pharmacy services and initiatives within a variety of clinical settings (aligned to Phase 1 UK MRC framework). This review serves as a useful resource for future researchers to inform their investigations. Greater emphasis to adopt a systematic approach in the reporting of the use of behavioural theories/models/frameworks will benefit pharmacy practice research and will support researchers in utilizing behavioural theories/models/framework in aspects of pharmacy practice research beyond intervention development

Prevalence and global trends of polypharmacy in patients with chronic kidney disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and objectives: Polypharmacy and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are becoming increasingly common due to an ageing population and the rise of multimorbidity. In line with the therapeutic guidelines, managing CKD and its complications necessitates prescribing multiple medications, which predisposes patients to polypharmacy. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to describe the prevalence of polypharmacy in patients with CKD and to explore the global trends of factors driving any apparent variability in prevalence estimates. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), and Google Scholar were searched from 1999 to November 2021. Study selection, data extraction, and critical appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. The pooled prevalence of polypharmacy was estimated utilizing the random effects model using the default double arcsine transformation. Results: This review involved 14 studies comprising of 17 201 participants, a significant proportion of which were males (56.12%). The mean age of the review population was 61.96 (SD ± 11.51) years. The overall pooled prevalence of polypharmacy amongst patients with CKD was 69% (95% CI: 49%–86%) (I2 = 100%, p < 0.0001), with a proportionately higher prevalence in North America and Europe as compared to Asia. Conclusion: The results from this meta-analysis showed a high pooled prevalence estimates of polypharmacy amongst patient cohorts with CKD. The exact interventions that are likely to significantly mitigate its effect remain uncertain and will need exploration by future prospective and systematic studies. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42022306572].Open Access funding provided by the Qatar National Library

Pharmacist-led educational interventions provided to healthcare providers to reduce medication errors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Medication errors are avoidable events that can occur at any stage of the medication use process. They are widespread in healthcare systems and are linked to an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Several strategies have been studied to reduce their occurrence including different types of pharmacy-based interventions. One of the main pharmacist-led interventions is educational programs, which seem to have promising benefits. To describe and compare various pharmacist-led educational interventions delivered to healthcare providers and to evaluate their impact qualitatively and quantitatively on medication error rates. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted through searching Cochrane Library, EBSCO, EMBASE, Medline and Google Scholar from inception to June 2020. Only interventional studies that reported medication error rate change after the intervention were included. Two independent authors worked through the data extraction and quality assessment using Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT). Summary odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model for rates of medication errors. Research protocol is available in The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration number CRD42019116465. Twelve studies involving 115058 participants were included. The two main recipients of the educational interventions were nurses and resident physicians. Educational programs involved lectures, posters, practical teaching sessions, audit and feedback method and flash cards of high-risk abbreviations. All studies included educational sessions as part of their program, either alone or in combination with other approaches, and most studies used errors encountered before implementing the intervention to inform the content of these sessions. Educational programs led by a pharmacist were associated with significant reductions in the overall rate of medication errors occurrence (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.65). Pharmacist-led educational interventions directed to healthcare providers are effective at reducing medication error rates. This review supports the implementation of pharmacist-led educational intervention aimed at reducing medication error

Critical care tele-pharmacy services during COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative exploration of healthcare practitioners' perceptions

What is Known and Objective: The scope of clinical pharmacy services has changed during COVID-19 pandemic with the view to mitigating both exposure and spread of the virus. The performance of novel pandemic-driven services such as tele-pharmacy has remained unexplored, until now. The aim of this study is to investigate the perceptions of healthcare providers of the impact of tele-pharmacy services provided in critical care units during COVID-19. Methods: A qualitative study of semi-structured interviews conducted with healthcare practitioners who worked in COVID-19 intensive care units and remotely interacted with clinical pharmacists at the Weill Cornell-affiliated Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. Random sampling technique was employed to recruit participants, with the resultant interview guide piloted before commencement of data collection process. Results and Discussion: From a total 129 and 200 physicians and nurses, respectively, 20 interviews were conducted with physicians (n = 15), and nurses (n = 5). From these interactions, a number of major themes emerged including: satisfactory understanding across clinical environment and personnel (physician and nurses) about remote clinical pharmacists' roles; additional robust feedback on the perception of the remote clinical pharmacy service; an understanding by ‘frontline’ health personnel on the discernible differences between remote and in-person coverage of clinical pharmacists; a reflection by both physicians and nurses on the novel challenges involved in the implementation of such pandemic-driven service; and solutions to overcome these challenges. What is New and Conclusion: In this novel qualitative study of pandemic-driven tele-pharmacy service, we found a positive perception amongst healthcare practitioners towards this service; with residual challenges that will need further evaluation by large sampled sized surveys or mixed methods research.The study was funded by the Medical Research Center, Hamad Medical Corporation (MRC‐01‐21‐746)

What is polypharmacy in people living with HIV/AIDS? A systematic review.

Polypharmacy in people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) is a rising morbidity that exacts hefty economic burden on health budgets in addition to other adverse clinical outcomes. Despite recent advances, uncertainty remains around its exact definition in PLWHA. In this systematic review and Meta-analysis, we explored relevant databases (PUBMED, EMBASE, CROI) for studies evaluating polypharmacy in PLWHA from January 2000 to August 2021 to ascertain the exact numerical threshold that defines this morbidity. Two independent reviewers extracted and reviewed relevant variables for analyses. The review included a total of 31 studies involving n = 53,347 participants with a mean age of 49.5 (SD ± 17.0) years. There was a total of 36 definitions, with 93.5% defining polypharmacy as the concomitant use of 5 or more medications. We found significant variation in the numerical definition of polypharmacy, with studies reporting it as "minor" (N = 3); "major" (N = 29); "severe" (N = 2); "excessive" (N = 1); and "higher" (N = 1). Most studies did not incorporate a duration (84%) in their definition and excluded ART medications (67.7%). A plurality of studies in PLWHA have established that polypharmacy in this cohort of patients is the intake of ≥ 5 medications (including both ART and non-ART). To standardize the approach to addressing this rising morbidity, we recommend incorporation of this definition into national and international PLWHA treatment guidelines

The Economic Impact of Optimizing a COVID-19 Management Protocol in Pre-Existing Cardiovascular Disease Patients

This study answers the question of whether the health care costs of managing COVID-19 in preexisting cardiovascular diseases (CVD) patients increased or decreased as a consequence of evidence-based efforts to optimize the initial COVID-19 management protocol in a CVD group of patients. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in preexisting CVD patients with COVID-19 in Hamad Medical Corporation, Qatar. From the health care perspective, only direct medical costs were considered, adjusted to their 2021 values. The impact of revising the protocol was a reduction in the overall costs in non-critically ill patients from QAR15,447 (USD 4243) to QAR4337 (USD 1191) per patient, with an economic benefit of QAR11,110 (USD 3051). In the critically ill patients, however, the cost increased from QAR202,094 (USD 55,505) to QAR292,856 (USD 80,433) per patient, with added cost of QAR90,762 (USD 24,928). Overall, regardless of critical care status, the optimization of the initial COVID-19 protocols in patients with preexisting CVD did not reduce overall health care costs, but increased it by QAR80,529 (USD 22,117) per patient

Interventions and impact of pharmacist-delivered services in perioperative setting on clinically important outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: The perioperative arena is a unique and challenging environment that requires coordination of the complex processes and involvement of the entire care team. Pharmacists’ scope of practice has been evolving to be patient-centered and to expand to variety of settings including perioperative settings. Objectives: To critically appraise, synthesize, and present the available evidence of the characteristics and impact of pharmacist-led interventions on clinically important outcomes in the perioperative settings. Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL from index inception to September 2023. Included studies compared the effectiveness of pharmacist-led interventions on clinically important outcomes (e.g. length of stay, readmission) compared to usual care in perioperative settings. Two independent reviewers extracted the data using the DEPICT-2 (Descriptive Elements of Pharmacist Intervention Characterization Tool) and undertook quality assessment using the Crowe Critical Appraisal (CCAT). A random-effect model was used to estimate the overall effect [odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous and standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous data] with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Twenty-five studies were eligible, 20 (80%) had uncontrolled study design. Most interventions were multicomponent and continuous over the perioperative period. The intervention components included clinical pharmacy services (e.g. medication management/optimization, medication reconciliation, discharge counseling) and education of healthcare professionals. While some studies provided a minor description in regards to the intervention development and processes, only one study reported a theoretical underpinning to intervention development. Pooled analyses showed a significant impact of pharmacist care compared to usual care on length of stay (11 studies; SMD −0.09; 95% CI −0.49 to −0.15) and all-cause readmissions (8 studies; OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.39–0.91). The majority of included studies ( n  = 21; 84%) were of moderate quality. Conclusion: Pharmacist-led interventions are effective at improving clinically important outcomes in the perioperative setting; however, most studies were of moderate quality. Studies lacked the utilization of theory to develop interventions; therefore, it is not clear whether theory-derived interventions are more effective than those without a theoretical element. Future research should prioritize the development and evaluation of multifaceted theory-informed pharmacist interventions that target the whole surgical care pathway