Intervention for a correct medication list and medication use in older adults: a non-randomised feasibility study among inpatients and residents during care transitions.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-10 DOI:10.1007/s11096-024-01702-4
Ahmed Al Musawi, Lina Hellström, Malin Axelsson, Patrik Midlöv, Margareta Rämgård, Yuanji Cheng, Tommy Eriksson
{"title":"Intervention for a correct medication list and medication use in older adults: a non-randomised feasibility study among inpatients and residents during care transitions.","authors":"Ahmed Al Musawi, Lina Hellström, Malin Axelsson, Patrik Midlöv, Margareta Rämgård, Yuanji Cheng, Tommy Eriksson","doi":"10.1007/s11096-024-01702-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medication discrepancies in care transitions and medication non-adherence are problematic. Few interventions consider the entire process, from the hospital to the patient's medication use at home.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>In preparation for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), this study aimed (1) to investigate the feasibility of recruitment and retention of patients, and data collection to reduce medication discrepancies at discharge and improve medication adherence, and (2) to explore the outcomes of the interventions.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants were recruited from a hospital and a residential area. Hospital patients participated in a pharmacist-led intervention to establish a correct medication list upon discharge and a follow-up interview two weeks post-discharge. All participants received a person-centred adherence intervention for three to six months. Discrepancies in the medication lists, the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ-S), and the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 87 asked to participate, 35 were included, and 12 completed the study. Identifying discrepancies, discussing discrepancies with physicians, and performing follow-up interviews were possible. Conducting the adherence intervention was also possible using individual health plans for medication use. Among the seven hospital patients, 24 discrepancies were found. Discharging physicians agreed that all discrepancies were errors, but only ten were corrected in the discharge information. Ten participants decreased their total BMQ-S concern scores, and seven increased their total MARS-5 scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on this study, conducting the two RCTs separately may increase the inclusion rate. Data collection was feasible. Both interventions were feasible in many aspects but need to be optimised in upcoming RCTs.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11133128/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01702-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medication discrepancies in care transitions and medication non-adherence are problematic. Few interventions consider the entire process, from the hospital to the patient's medication use at home.

Aim: In preparation for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), this study aimed (1) to investigate the feasibility of recruitment and retention of patients, and data collection to reduce medication discrepancies at discharge and improve medication adherence, and (2) to explore the outcomes of the interventions.

Method: Participants were recruited from a hospital and a residential area. Hospital patients participated in a pharmacist-led intervention to establish a correct medication list upon discharge and a follow-up interview two weeks post-discharge. All participants received a person-centred adherence intervention for three to six months. Discrepancies in the medication lists, the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ-S), and the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) were assessed.

Results: Of 87 asked to participate, 35 were included, and 12 completed the study. Identifying discrepancies, discussing discrepancies with physicians, and performing follow-up interviews were possible. Conducting the adherence intervention was also possible using individual health plans for medication use. Among the seven hospital patients, 24 discrepancies were found. Discharging physicians agreed that all discrepancies were errors, but only ten were corrected in the discharge information. Ten participants decreased their total BMQ-S concern scores, and seven increased their total MARS-5 scores.

Conclusion: Based on this study, conducting the two RCTs separately may increase the inclusion rate. Data collection was feasible. Both interventions were feasible in many aspects but need to be optimised in upcoming RCTs.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
老年人正确用药清单和用药干预:在护理过渡期间对住院病人和居民进行的非随机可行性研究。
背景:护理过渡中的用药差异和不遵医嘱用药是个问题。目的:为准备随机对照试验(RCT),本研究旨在(1)调查招募和留住患者的可行性,并收集数据,以减少出院时的用药差异并改善用药依从性;(2)探讨干预措施的结果:方法:从一家医院和一个居民区招募参与者。医院患者在出院时参加了由药剂师主导的干预活动,以建立正确的用药清单,并在出院两周后参加了随访。所有参与者都接受了为期三至六个月的以人为本的坚持用药干预。对用药清单中的差异、药品信念问卷(BMQ-S)和用药依从性报告量表(MARS-5)进行了评估:结果:在 87 名被要求参与的人员中,有 35 人被纳入其中,12 人完成了研究。发现差异、与医生讨论差异并进行后续访谈是可能的。此外,还可以利用个人用药健康计划进行用药依从性干预。在七名住院患者中,共发现了 24 项差异。出院医生一致认为所有差异都是错误,但只有 10 项差异在出院信息中得到了纠正。10 名参与者的 BMQ-S 总分有所下降,7 名参与者的 MARS-5 总分有所上升:结论:根据本研究,分别进行两项 RCT 可以提高纳入率。数据收集是可行的。这两项干预措施在很多方面都是可行的,但需要在今后的 RCT 中加以优化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences. IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy. IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy . Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the impact of baseline platelet count on linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia: a retrospective single-center observation study. Sentiment analysis in medication adherence: using ruled-based and artificial intelligence-driven algorithms to understand patient medication experiences. Translation and validation of the CLEO tool in Vietnamese to assess the significance of pharmacist interventions. Association of polypharmacy with clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization in older adults with cardiometabolic diseases: a retrospective cohort study. Correction: Development and validation of a Medication Adherence Universal Questionnaire: the MAUQ.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1