首页> 外文期刊>The annals of pharmacotherapy >Evaluation of medication-related problems in medication reviews: A comparative perspective [Evaluación de problemas relacionados a fármacos en revisiones de medicamentos: Una perspectiva comparativa]
【24h】

Evaluation of medication-related problems in medication reviews: A comparative perspective [Evaluación de problemas relacionados a fármacos en revisiones de medicamentos: Una perspectiva comparativa]

机译:药物评价中与药物有关的问题的评价:比较观点[药物评价中与药物有关的问题的评价:比较观点]

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

BACKGROUND: The elderly population is at a high risk of medication misadventure, with many studies reporting a high number of medication-related problems (MRPs) in this group. OBJECTIVE: To quantify MRPs in residential facilities routinely reviewed by pharmacists and compare these results with other published findings. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included deidentified residents' health and medication data from 6 aged-care facilities. Regular medication reviews had been conducted over 20 years in these facilities. Two hundred ninety-six pharmacist intervention report forms were completed by 3 accredited clinical pharmacists over a 2-year period. These data were then used as a baseline in analyzing other published data for residential aged-care facilities and for patients at home. RESULTS: A total of 802 (range 0-12 per review) MRPs were identified in patients who were prescribed 2-29 medicines per patient, with a mean of 2.7 MRPs per review (95% CI 2.43 to 2.98). An analysis of the literature showed that the length of treatment, inclusion criteria used, and the definition of MRPs greatly affected the results obtained. However, application of the different inclusion criteria used in other published studies to our data resulted in findings similar to the published Australian average for residents of aged-care facilities and patients living independently at home (3.9 and 4.8 MRPs per patient, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: All medicines can potentially lead to MRPs. MRPs identified during pharmacist medication reviews vary widely between studies but can be normalized by inclusion criteria, length of stay, and the nature of the identified problem. It is recommended that a minimum benchmark for best practice in a patient population receiving at least yearly reviews be less than 3 MRPs per patient. Higher benchmarks of 4 MRPs per patient should apply when the patient population is restricted to include those receiving more than 9 medications and with more than 2 MRPs.
机译:背景:老年人群发生药物滥用的风险很高,许多研究报告称这一组中存在大量与药物有关的问题(MRP)。目的:量化药剂师常规检查的住宅设施中的MRP,并将这些结果与其他已发表的发现进行比较。方法:这项横断面研究包括来自6个老年护理机构的已确定身份的居民健康和用药数据。在这些机构中进行了20多年的常规用药审查。由3名合格的临床药剂师在2年内完成了696份药剂师干预报告表。然后,这些数据被用作分析住宅养老机构和家庭患者的其他已发布数据的基准。结果:在每位患者开具2-29药物的患者中,共鉴定出802个MRP,每个患者平均MRP 2.7个(95%CI为2.43至2.98)。文献分析表明,治疗时间长短,使用的入选标准和MRP的定义极大地影响了获得的结果。但是,将其他已发表研究中使用的不同纳入标准应用到我们的数据中,得出的结果与澳大利亚已公布的老年人护理设施的居民和独立居住的患者的平均值相似(每位患者分别为3.9和4.8 MRP)。结论:所有药物均可能导致MRP。在研究之间,药剂师用药审查期间确定的MRP差异很大,但可以通过纳入标准,住院时间和所发现问题的性质进行标准化。建议在至少每年接受一次检查的患者人群中,最佳实践的最低基准应低于每名患者3 MRP。当患者人群被限制为包括接受9种以上药物和2种以上MRP的患者时,应采用每位患者4种MRP的更高基准。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号