Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 35, Issue 5, pp 753–762 | Cite as

Identification of drug-related problems by a clinical pharmacist in addition to computerized alerts

  • Rianne J. ZaalEmail author
  • Mark M. P. M. Jansen
  • Marjolijn Duisenberg-van Essenberg
  • Cees C. Tijssen
  • Jan A. Roukema
  • Patricia M. L. A. van den Bemt
Research Article

Abstract

Background Both clinical pharmacists and computerized physician order entry systems with clinical decision support (CPOE/CDSS) can reduce drug-related problems (DRPs). However, the contribution of a clinical pharmacist in addition to CPOE/CDSS has not been established in a prospective study. Objective To determine which DRPs can be identified by a clinical pharmacist in a setting with routine use of CPOE/CDSS. Setting Two surgical and two neurological wards in St. Elisabeth hospital, a 600-bed teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Methods In this observational prospective follow-up study a clinical pharmacist reviewed the pharmacotherapy of patients admitted to surgical and neurological wards to identify DRPs (i.e. medication errors and adverse drug events) and discussed the relevance of identified problems and interventions to resolve these with the responsible physician. Acceptance of the proposed interventions and the presence of alerts in CPOE/CDSS were assessed. Primary outcome was the proportion of DRPs identified by the clinical pharmacist that also triggered a CPOE/CDSS alert. Differences between the DRPs that generated an alert and those that did not were expressed as relative risks or analyzed with Chi square statistics or Mann–Whitney U tests. Main outcome measure The proportion of drug-related problems identified by the clinical pharmacist that also generated an alert in the CPOE/CDSS. Results During 1206 medication reviews, 442 potential DRPs were identified; 286 (65 %) DRPs were considered relevant and 247 (56 %) of the proposed interventions were accepted. A CPOE/CDSS alert was generated for 35 (8 %) of the DRPs the clinical pharmacist identified. The only difference between problems that triggered an alert and those that did not was the class of the DRP (indication 23 vs. 36 %, effectiveness 23 vs. 13 %, safety 23 vs. 10 % and pharmaceutical care issues 31 vs. 42 %, p = 0.02). CPOE/CDSS triggered 623 additional alerts that were handled during routine pharmacy service. Conclusions As most DRPs identified by a clinical pharmacist were not detected in daily clinical practice by CPOE/CDSS, a clinical pharmacist contributes to reducing DRPs. The sensitivity of CPOE/CDSS to detect certain classes of problems should be optimized.

Keywords

Adverse drug events Clinical decision support system Clinical pharmacist Computerized physician order entry Medication errors The Netherlands 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Our special thanks are expressed to all physicians of the study wards, Coen van Hees (nurse practitioner) and Walther Jansen (physician assistant) for their participation in the discussion of drug-related problems.

Funding

None.

Conflicts of interest

Authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Hoonhout LH, de Bruijne MC, Wagner C, Asscheman H, van der Wal G, van Tulder MW. Nature, occurrence and consequences of medication-related adverse events during hospitalization: a retrospective chart review in the Netherlands. Drug Saf. 2010;33(10):853–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Krahenbuhl-Melcher A, Schlienger R, Lampert M, Haschke M, Drewe J, Krahenbuhl S. Drug-related problems in hospitals: a review of the recent literature. Drug Saf. 2007;30(5):379–407.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    IOM (Institute of Medicine). To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington: National Academy Press; 2000. ISBN 978-0-309-26174-6.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Classen DC, Resar R, Griffin F, Federico F, Frankel T, Kimmel N, et al. ‘Global trigger tool’ shows that adverse events in hospitals may be ten times greater than previously measured. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30(4):581–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Landrigan CP, Parry GJ, Bones CB, Hackbarth AD, Goldmann DA, Sharek PJ. Temporal trends in rates of patient harm resulting from medical care. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(22):2124–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    IOM (Institute of Medicine). Health IT and patient safety: building safer systems for better care. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2012. ISBN 978-0-309-22112-2.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bates DW, Miller EB, Cullen DJ, Burdick L, Williams L, Laird N, et al. Patient risk factors for adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. ADE Prevention Study Group. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159(21):2553–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dean B, Schachter M, Vincent C, Barber N. Causes of prescribing errors in hospital inpatients: a prospective study. Lancet. 2002;359(9315):1373–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leape LL, Bates DW, Cullen DJ, Cooper J, Demonaco HJ, Gallivan T, et al. Systems analysis of adverse drug events. ADE Prevention Study Group. JAMA. 1995;274(1):35–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lesar TS, Briceland L, Stein DS. Factors related to errors in medication prescribing. JAMA. 1997;277(4):312–7.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zaal RJ, van Doormaal JE, Lenderink AW, Mol PG, Kosterink JG, Egberts TC, et al. Comparison of potential risk factors for medication errors with and without patient harm. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2010;19(8):825–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Coiera E, Aarts J, Kulikowski C. The dangerous decade. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012;19(1):2–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ammenwerth E, Schnell-Inderst P, Machan C, Siebert U. The effect of electronic prescribing on medication errors and adverse drug events: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008;15(5):585–600.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bates DW, Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Laird N, Petersen LA, Teich JM, et al. Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. JAMA. 1998;280(15):1311–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eslami S, de Keizer NF, Abu-Hanna A. The impact of computerized physician medication order entry in hospitalized patients—a systematic review. Int J Med Inform. 2008;77(6):365–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaushal R, Shojania KG, Bates DW. Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(12):1409–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rommers MK, Teepe-Twiss IM, Guchelaar HJ. A computerized adverse drug event alerting system using clinical rules: a retrospective and prospective comparison with conventional medication surveillance in the Netherlands. Drug Saf. 2011;34(3):233–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shamliyan TA, Duval S, Du J, Kane RL. Just what the doctor ordered. Review of the evidence of the impact of computerized physician order entry system on medication errors. Health Serv Res. 2008;43(1 Pt 1):32–53.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Doormaal JE, Rommers MK, Kosterink JG, Teepe-Twiss IM, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Mol PG. Comparison of methods for identifying patients at risk of medication-related harm. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19(6):e26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    van Doormaal JE, van den Bemt PMLA, Zaal RJ, Egberts AC, Lenderink BW, Kosterink JG, et al. The influence that electronic prescribing has on medication errors and preventable adverse drug events: an interrupted time-series study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16(6):816–25.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    van Doormaal JE, van den Bemt PMLA, Mol PG, Zaal RJ, Egberts AC, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, et al. Medication errors: the impact of prescribing and transcribing errors on preventable harm in hospitalised patients. Qual Saf Health Care. 2009;18(1):22–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    van der Sijs H, Aarts J, Vulto A, Berg M. Overriding of drug safety alerts in computerized physician order entry. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006;13(2):138–47.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bedouch P, Allenet B, Grass A, Labarere J, Brudieu E, Bosson JL, et al. Drug-related problems in medical wards with a computerized physician order entry system. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2009;34(2):187–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bosma L, Jansman FG, Franken AM, Harting JW, Van den Bemt PMLA. Evaluation of pharmacist clinical interventions in a Dutch hospital setting. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30(1):31–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Boyko WL Jr, Yurkowski PJ, Ivey MF, Armitstead JA, Roberts BL. Pharmacist influence on economic and morbidity outcomes in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1997;54(14):1591–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Buck TC, Brandstrup L, Brandslund I, Kampmann JP. The effects of introducing a clinical pharmacist on orthopaedic wards in Denmark. Pharm World Sci. 2007;29(1):12–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kaboli PJ, Hoth AB, McClimon BJ, Schnipper JL. Clinical pharmacists and inpatient medical care: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(9):955–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Klopotowska JE, Kuiper R, van Kan HJ, de Pont AC, Dijkgraaf MG, Lie-A-Huen L, et al. On-ward participation of a hospital pharmacist in a Dutch intensive care unit reduces prescribing errors and related patient harm: an intervention study. Crit Care. 2010;14(5):R174.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kopp BJ, Mrsan M, Erstad BL, Duby JJ. Cost implications of and potential adverse events prevented by interventions of a critical care pharmacist. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2007;64(23):2483–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Makowsky MJ, Koshman SL, Midodzi WK, Tsuyuki RT. Capturing outcomes of clinical activities performed by a rounding pharmacist practicing in a team environment: the COLLABORATE study [NCT00351676]. Med Care. 2009;47(6):642–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rommers MK, Teepe-Twiss IM, Guchelaar HJ. Preventing adverse drug events in hospital practice: an overview. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007;16(10):1129–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Scarsi KK, Fotis MA, Noskin GA. Pharmacist participation in medical rounds reduces medication errors. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2002;59(21):2089–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    de Vries EN, Ramrattan MA, Smorenburg SM, Gouma DJ, Boermeester MA. The incidence and nature of in-hospital adverse events: a systematic review. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17(3):216–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fijn R, Van den Bemt PMLA, Chow M, De Blaey CJ, De Jong-Van den Berg LT, Brouwers JR. Hospital prescribing errors: epidemiological assessment of predictors. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;53(3):326–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    van Roon EN, Flikweert S, le Comte M, Langendijk PN, Kwee-Zuiderwijk WJ, Smits P, et al. Clinical relevance of drug–drug interactions: a structured assessment procedure. Drug Saf. 2005;28(12):1131–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    van den Bemt PMLA, Egberts TC, De Jong-Van den Berg LT, Brouwers JR. Drug-related problems in hospitalised patients. Drug Saf. 2000;22(4):321–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Leendertse AJ, de Koning FH, Goudswaard AN, Jonkhoff AR, van den Bogert SC, de Gier HJ, et al. Preventing hospital admissions by reviewing medication (PHARM) in primary care: design of the cluster randomised, controlled, multi-centre PHARM-study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11(1):4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Strand LM, Morley PC, Cipolle RJ, Ramsey R, Lamsam GD. Drug-related problems: their structure and function. DICP. 1990;24(11):1093–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    van den Bemt PMLA, van den Broek S, van Nunen AK, Harbers JB, Lenderink AW. Medication reconciliation performed by pharmacy technicians at the time of preoperative screening. Ann Pharmacother. 2009;43(5):868–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Preventing. NCC MERP Index for Categorizing Medication Errors. www.nccmerp.org/pdf/indexColor2001-06-12.pdf. Accessed 5 April 2012.
  41. 41.
    van Doormaal JE, Mol PG, van den Bemt PMLA, Zaal RJ, Egberts AC, Kosterink JG, et al. Reliability of the assessment of preventable adverse drug events in daily clinical practice. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008;17(7):645–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bedouch P, Tessier A, Baudrant M, Labarere J, Foroni L, Calop J, et al. Computerized physician order entry system combined with on-ward pharmacist: analysis of pharmacists’ interventions. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012;18(4):911–8.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Nebeker JR, Hoffman JM, Weir CR, Bennett CL, Hurdle JF. High rates of adverse drug events in a highly computerized hospital. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(10):1111–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Chisholm-Burns MA, Kim Lee J, Spivey CA, Slack M, Herrier RN, Hall-Lipsy E, et al. US pharmacists’ effect as team members on patient care: systematic review and meta-analyses. Med Care. 2010;48(10):923–33.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Eppenga WL, Derijks HJ, Conemans JM, Hermens WA, Wensing M, De Smet PA. Comparison of a basic and an advanced pharmacotherapy-related clinical decision support system in a hospital care setting in the Netherlands. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012;19(1):66–71.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Scheepers-Hoeks AM, Grouls RJ, Neef C, Korsten HH. Strategy for implementation and first results of advanced clinical decision support in hospital pharmacy practice. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;148:142–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rianne J. Zaal
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mark M. P. M. Jansen
    • 2
  • Marjolijn Duisenberg-van Essenberg
    • 2
  • Cees C. Tijssen
    • 3
  • Jan A. Roukema
    • 4
  • Patricia M. L. A. van den Bemt
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Hospital PharmacyErasmus Medical CenterRotterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Clinical PharmacyTweeSteden Hospital and St. Elisabeth HospitalTilburgThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of NeurologySt. Elisabeth HospitalTilburgThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of SurgerySt. Elisabeth HospitalTilburgThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations