Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35919807›Full record

ArticlePharmacy practice

Pharmacist-led medication reconciliation on admission to an acute psychiatric hospital unit.

Joelizy Oliveira, Thaís Costa E Silva, Ana C Cabral, Marta Lavrador, Filipe F Almeida, António Macedo, Carlos Saraiva, Fernando Fernandez-Llimos, M Margarida Caramona, Isabel V Figueiredo and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Pharmacist Intervention in Portuguese Older Adult Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  10. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Joelizy OliveiraPharmacology and Pharmaceutical Care Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal. joelizy@hotmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2812-0042
Thaís Costa E SilvaPharmacology and Pharmaceutical Care Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal. thaaiscolombo@hotmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7989-5788
Ana C CabralPharmacology and Pharmaceutical Care Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Coimbra, Portugal. anacgcabral@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6973-0544
Marta LavradorPharmacology and Pharmaceutical Care Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Coimbra, Portugal. martalavrador@hotmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8582-7853
Filipe F AlmeidaServiço de Psiquiatria. Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra. Coimbra. Portugal. f.felix.almeida@gmail.com.
António MacedoServiço de Psiquiatria. Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra. Coimbra. Portugal. amacedo@ci.uc.pt.
Carlos SaraivaFaculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal. cbsaraiva@ci.uc.pt.
Fernando Fernandez-LlimosLaboratory of Pharmacology, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto. Porto (Portugal). fllimos@ff.up.pt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8529-9595
M Margarida CaramonaPharmacology and Pharmaceutical Care Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Coimbra, Portugal. caramona@ci.uc.pt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1950-9360
Isabel V FigueiredoPharmacology and Pharmaceutical Care Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Coimbra, Portugal. isabel@ff.uc.pt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0127-4575
M Margarida Castel-BrancoPharmacology and Pharmaceutical Care Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Coimbra Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Coimbra, Portugal. mmcb@ci.uc.pt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6533-9932
University of Coimbra · PTHospitais da Universidade de Coimbra · PTUniversidade do Porto · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Therapy management in patients suffering from mental health disorders is complex and the risks derived from changes or interruptions of treatment should not be ignored. Medication reconciliation in psychiatry may reduce medication errors and promote patient safety during transitions of care. Objective: To identify the influence of complementary information sources in the construction of the best possible medication history, and to ascertain the potential clinical impact of discrepancies identified in a medication reconciliation service. Methods: An observational study was conducted in an acute mental hospital unit, with a further validation in an internal medicine unit. Adult patients taking at least one medicine admitted in the unit were included. Patients/caregivers were interviewed upon admission and the information gathered was compared with hospital medical and shared electronic medical records. Once the best possible medication history was gathered, therapeutic information was reconciled against the prescription on admission to identify discrepancies. Potential clinical impact of medication errors was classified using the International Safety Classification. Results: During the study period, 148 patients were admitted, 50.7% females, mean age 54.6 years (SD=16.3). Collaboration of a caregiver was a needed in 74% of the interviews. In total, 1,147 drugs were considered to obtain patients' best possible medication history. After reconciliation, 560 clinically sound intentional discrepancies were identified and 359 discrepancies required further clarification from prescribers: 84.12% "drug omission", 5.57% "drug substitution", 6.96% "dose change", and 3.34% "dosage frequency change". Potential clinical impact of these medication discrepancies was classified as: 95 mild, 100 moderate, and 29 severe medication errors. Conclusion: About 1 in three intentional discrepancies observed in a pharmacists-led medication reconciliation service required further clarification from prescribers, being 80% of them unintentional discrepancies. Results highlight the importance of the caregiver as source of information for the psychiatric patient, the relevance of analyzing shared electronic health records until 6 months before, and the need to use hospital medical records efficiently. Additionally, 29 discrepancies were classified as errors with potentially severe clinical impact. A medication reconciliation service is concluded to be feasible and necessary in a mental health unit.

Indexed as

Medication ErrorsMedication ReconciliationPatient SafetyTransitional Care

Identifiers

PMID35919807
PMCPMC9296076
OpenAlexW4285022270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.