...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Emergency Medicine >A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY OF MEDICATION RECONCILIATION USING PHARMACY TECHNICIANS IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT TO REDUCE MEDICATION ERRORS AMONG ADMITTED PATIENTS
【24h】

A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY OF MEDICATION RECONCILIATION USING PHARMACY TECHNICIANS IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT TO REDUCE MEDICATION ERRORS AMONG ADMITTED PATIENTS

机译:在紧急情况部门中使用药物技术调解药物以减少入院患者药物错误的前瞻性队列研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background: The collection of a complete, verified medication history is essential to patient safety. The involvement of clinical pharmacists has been shown to improve the completeness and accuracy of medication histories; however, to our knowledge, involvement of pharmacy technicians has not been studied. Objective: Our aim was to determine whether verification of medication histories by pharmacy technicians in the emergency department (ED) would result in fewer errors in inpatient medication regimens compared to verification by the admitting physician team. Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study of adult ED patients admitted for continuing care. In the intervention group, medication reconciliation was performed by pharmacy technicians in the ED before the creation of physician admitting orders. In the control group, pharmacy technicians conducted their history taking later, after admission. Initial admitting orders were then compared to the pharmacy technicians' medication reconciliation taken before admission (intervention group) or after admission (control group). Medication discrepancies were classified and determined to be justified or unjustified. Unjustified discrepancies were rated for harm potential. Results: In our cohort of 113 intervention and 75 control subjects, the mean age was 55 years (standard deviation [SD] 16 years); 96 patients (51%) were male. In the intervention group, 566 changes to home medications were observed on admission; 352 (62%) were unjustified. Among controls, 406 changes to home medications were observed; 228 (56%) were unjustified. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.0586). The rate of unjustified medication changes per patient was likewise not significantly different (3.14 [SD 2.98] in interventions vs. 3.17 [SD 2.81] in controls; p = 0.9570). The rate of medical errors did not differ between study groups, nor did severity ratings of unjustified changes. Conclusions: Medication reconciliation by pharmacy technicians in the ED did not lead to a significant reduction in unjustified medication discrepancies. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc.
机译:背景:收集完整,经过验证的用药史对于患者安全至关重要。临床药师的参与已被证明可以改善用药史的完整性和准确性。但是,据我们所知,尚未研究药房技术人员的参与。目的:我们的目的是确定与入院医师团队进行的验证相比,急诊科(ED)的药房技术人员对药物历史的验证是否会减少住院用药方案中的错误。方法:我们对接受持续护理的成年ED患者进行了一项前瞻性队列研究。在干预组中,急诊室中的药房技术人员在创建医生接纳令之前对药物进行调和。在对照组中,药房技术人员入院后进行了病史采集。然后将最初的入院订单与药房技术人员的入院前(干预组)或入院后(对照组)的用药核对进行比较。药物差异被分类并确定为合理或不合理。对不合理的差异进行了潜在危害评估。结果:在我们的113名干预者和75名对照者的队列中,平均年龄为55岁(标准差[SD] 16岁); 96名患者(51%)是男性。在干预组中,入院时观察到566种家庭用药发生了变化。 352(62%)不合理。在对照组中,观察到406种家庭用药发生了变化。 228(56%)不合理。该差异无统计学意义(p = 0.0586)。每位患者的不合理用药变化率也没有显着差异(干预组为3.14 [SD 2.98],对照组为3.17 [SD 2.81]; p = 0.9570)。各研究组之间的医疗错误率没有差异,无正当变化的严重性等级也没有差异。结论:急诊部的药房技术人员进行药物调和并没有显着减少不合理的药物差异。 (C)2015爱思唯尔公司

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