Frequency of occurrence of medication discrepancies and associated risk factors in cases of acute hospital admission

Background: Medication discrepancies are a common occurrence following hospital admission and carry the potential for causing harm. However, little is known about the potential risk factors involved in medication discrepancies. Objective: The objective of this study was to determine how frequently medication discrepancies occur and their associated risk factors, in patients hospitalized via the emergency department of the Spaarne Gasthuis Hospital, located in The Netherlands. Methods: This retrospective observational study examines 832 hospital admissions which took place between April 1st and June 30th, 2015. Medication reconciliation was performed within 24 hours of admission and medication discrepancies were registered. The primary outcome recorded in the study was the proportion of patients experiencing one or more medication discrepancies, as verified by the physician. As a secondary outcome, the association between these discrepancies and pre-specified variables was analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results: At least one medication discrepancy was found to have occurred with 97 of the 832 patients (11.7%), the most common discrepancies involving incorrect drug dose (44.9%) and omission of medication (36.4%). In the univariate analysis, age (OR=1.03 [95% CI 1.02:1.04] p<0.001) and number of pre-admission medications taken (OR=1.13 [95%CI 1.09:1.17] p<0.001) were revealed to be significantly associated with the risk of medication discrepancies. Sex, type of medical specialty, and surgical versus non-surgical specialty were found not to be significantly associated with discrepancies. In the multivariate analysis, both the number of pre-admission medications (OR=1.10 [95%CI 1.06:1.15] p<0.001) and age (OR=1.02 [95%CI 1.01:1.03] p=0.004) were independently associated with the risk of medication discrepancy. Conclusions: Of the total number of patients, 11.7% experienced one or more medication discrepancies following admission to the hospital. Elderly patients taking multiple drugs were found to be particularly at risk

Multidimensional prognostic indices for use in COPD patient care. A systematic review

Contains fulltext : 98117.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: A growing number of prognostic indices for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is developed for clinical use. Our aim is to identify, summarize and compare all published prognostic COPD indices, and to discuss their performance, usefulness and implementation in daily practice. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in both Pubmed and Embase up to September 2010. Selection criteria included primary publications of indices developed for stable COPD patients, that predict future outcome by a multidimensional scoring system, developed for and validated with COPD patients only. Two reviewers independently assessed the index quality using a structured screening form for systematically scoring prognostic studies. RESULTS: Of 7,028 articles screened, 13 studies comprising 15 indices were included. Only 1 index had been explored for its application in daily practice. We observed 21 different predictors and 7 prognostic outcomes, the latter reflecting mortality, hospitalization and exacerbation. Consistent strong predictors were FEV1 percentage predicted, age and dyspnoea. The quality of the studies underlying the indices varied between fairly poor and good. Statistical methods to assess the predictive abilities of the indices were heterogenic. They generally revealed moderate to good discrimination, when measured. Limitations: We focused on prognostic indices for stable disease only and, inevitably, quality judgment was prone to subjectivity. CONCLUSIONS: We identified 15 prognostic COPD indices. Although the prognostic performance of some of the indices has been validated, they all lack sufficient evidence for implementation. Whether or not the use of prognostic indices improves COPD disease management or patients' health is currently unknown; impact studies are required to establish this