Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27288369›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Applying quality improvement methods to address gaps in medicines reconciliation at transfers of care from an acute UK hospital.

Vanessa Marvin, Shirley Kuo, Alan J Poots, Tom Woodcock, Louella Vaughan, Derek Bell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Successful Healthcare Improvements From Translating Evidence in complex systems (SHIFT-Evidence): simple rules to guide practice and research.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Deprescribing medicines in the acute setting to reduce the risk of falls.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2017
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Vanessa MarvinPharmacy Department, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Shirley KuoPharmacy Department, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alan J PootsNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) North West London (NWL), Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2331-0904
Tom WoodcockNIHR CLAHRC NWL, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4735-4856
Louella VaughanNIHR CLAHRC NWL, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Derek BellDepartment of Acute Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9944-1097

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesReliable reconciliation of medicines at admission and discharge from hospital is key to reducing unintentional prescribing discrepancies at transitions of healthcare. We introduced a team approach to the reconciliation process at an acute hospital with the aim of improving the provision of information and documentation of reliable medication lists to enable clear, timely communications on discharge.

settingAn acute 400-bedded teaching hospital in London, UK.

participantsThe effects of change were measured in a simple random sample of 10 adult patients a week on the acute admissions unit over 18 months.

interventionsQuality improvement methods were used throughout. Interventions included education and training of staff involved at ward level and in the pharmacy department, introduction of medication documentation templates for electronic prescribing and for communicating information on medicines in discharge summaries co-designed with patient representatives.

resultsStatistical process control analysis showed reliable documentation (complete, verified and intentional changes clarified) of current medication on 49.2% of patients' discharge summaries. This appears to have improved (to 85.2%) according to a poststudy audit the year after the project end. Pharmacist involvement in discharge reconciliation increased significantly, and improvements in the numbers of medicines prescribed in error, or omitted from the discharge prescription, are demonstrated. Variation in weekly measures is seen throughout but particularly at periods of changeover of new doctors and introduction of new systems.

conclusionsNew processes led to a sustained increase in reconciled medications and, thereby, an improvement in the number of patients discharged from hospital with unintentional discrepancies (errors or omissions) on their discharge prescription. The initiatives were pharmacist-led but involved close working and shared understanding about roles and responsibilities between doctors, nurses, therapists, patients and their carers.

Indexed as

Hospitals, TeachingMedication ReconciliationQuality ImprovementContinuity of Patient CareCooperative BehaviorDocumentationHumansLondonMaleMedication ErrorsMiddle AgedPatient DischargePharmacy Service, Hospitalhospital pharmacistMedication reconciliationPatient safetyquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID27288369
PMCPMC4908889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.