Using ActionADE to create information continuity to reduce re-exposures to harmful medications: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Jeffrey P Hau, Penelope M A Brasher, Amber Cragg, Serena Small, Maeve Wickham, Corinne M Hohl, Jeffrey P Hau, Penelope M A Brasher, Amber Cragg, Serena Small, Maeve Wickham, Corinne M Hohl

Abstract

Background: Repeat exposures to culprit medications are a common cause of preventable adverse drug events. Health information technologies have the potential to reduce repeat adverse drug events by improving information continuity. However, they rarely interoperate to ensure providers can view adverse drug events documented in other systems. We designed ActionADE to enable rapid documentation of adverse drug events and communication of standardized information across health sectors by integrating with legacy systems. We will leverage ActionADE's implementation to conduct two parallel, randomized trials: patients with adverse drug reactions in the main trial and those diagnosed with non-adherence in a secondary trial. Primary objective of the main trial is to evaluate the effects of providing information continuity about adverse drug reactions on culprit medication re-dispensations over 12 months. Primary objective of the secondary trial is to evaluate the effect of providing information continuity on adherence over 12 months.

Methods: We will conduct two parallel group, triple-blind randomized controlled trials in participating hospitals in British Columbia, Canada. We will enroll adults presenting to hospital with an adverse drug event to prescribed outpatient medication. Clinicians will document the adverse drug event in ActionADE. The software will use an algorithm to determine patient eligibility and allocate eligible patients to experimental or control. In the experimental arm, ActionADE will transmit information to PharmaNet, where adverse drug event information will be displayed in community pharmacies when re-dispensations are attempted. In the control arm, ActionADE will retain information in the local record. We will enroll 3600 adults with an adverse drug reaction into the main trial. The main trial's primary outcome is re-dispensation of a culprit or same-class medication within 12 months; the secondary trial's primary outcome will be adherence to culprit medication. Secondary outcomes include health services utilization and mortality.

Discussion: These studies have the potential to guide policy decisions and investments needed to drive health information technology integrations to prevent repeat adverse drug events. We present an example of how a health information technology implementation can be leveraged to conduct pragmatic randomized controlled trials.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04568668 , NCT04574648 . Registered on 1 October 2020.

Keywords: Adverse drug events; Health information technology; Medication safety; Randomized controlled trial.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials diagram. Asterisk indicates variable information collected through administrative data

References

    1. Rotermann M, Sanmartin C, Hennessy D, Arthur M. Prescription medication use by Canadians aged 6 to 79. Stat Can Health Rep. 2014;25(6):3–9.
    1. Canadian Institute for Health Information . Drug use among seniors in Canada, 2016. Ottawa: CIHI; 2018.
    1. Budnitz DS, Lovegrove MC, Shehab N, Richards CL. Emergency hospitalizations for adverse drug events in older Americans. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(21):2002–2012. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1103053.
    1. Zed PJ, Abu-Laban RB, Balen RM, Loewen PS, Hohl CM, Brubacher JR, et al. Incidence, severity and preventability of medication-related visits to the emergency department: a prospective study. CMAJ. 2008;178(12):1563–1569. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.071594.
    1. Canadian Institute for Health Information . NACRS emergency department visits and length of stay by province/territory, 2018–2019. Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information; 2019.
    1. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; ODPHP; United States Department of Health and Human Services. National action plan for adverse drug event prevention. Washington, DC; 2014. .
    1. World Health Organization. Medication without harm - global patient safety challenge on medication safety. Geneva; 2017. .
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality . Medication errors and adverse drug events. Rockville: US Department of Health & Human Services; 2019.
    1. Charles K, Cannon M, Hall R, Coustasse A. Can utilizing a computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system prevent hospital medical errors and adverse drug events? Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2014;11(Fall):1b.
    1. Nuckols TK, Smith-Spangler C, Morton SC, Asch SM, Patel VM, Anderson LJ, et al. The effectiveness of computerized order entry at reducing preventable adverse drug events and medication errors in hospital settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2014;3:56. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-56.
    1. Hohl CM, Zed PJ, Brubacher JR, Abu-Laban RB, Loewen PS, Purssell RA. Do emergency physicians attribute drug-related emergency department visits to medication-related problems? Ann Emerg Med. 2010;55(6):493–502. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2009.10.008.
    1. Bate A, Lindquist M, Edwards IR, Olsson S, Orre R, Lansner A, et al. A Bayesian neural network method for adverse drug reaction signal generation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1998;54(4):315–321. doi: 10.1007/s002280050466.
    1. Hohl CM, Woo SA, Cragg A, Wickham ME, Ackerley C, Scheuermeyer F, et al. Repeat adverse drug events associated with outpatient medications: a descriptive analysis of 3 observational studies in British Columbia, Canada. CMAJ Open. 2019;7(3):E446–Ee53. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20180190.
    1. van der Linden CMJJP, van Marum RJ, Grouls RJE, Korsten EHM, Egberts ACG. Recurrence of adverse drug reactions following inappropriate re-prescription better documentation, availability of information and monitoring are needed. Drug Saf. 2010;33:535–538. doi: 10.2165/11532350-000000000-00000.
    1. Welk B, Richard L, Winick-Ng J, Shariff SZ, Clemens KK. The burden of repeat prescribing medications after a related adverse drug event. Healthc Q. 2018;21(1):36–39. doi: 10.12927/hcq.2018.25526.
    1. Hohl CM, Nosyk B, Zed P, Kuramoto L, Sobolev B, Brubacher J, et al. Outcomes of emergency department patients presenting with adverse drug events. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;58:270–279. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.01.003.
    1. Budnitz D. National injury surveillance system - cooperative adverse drug event surveillance project (NEISS-CADES) 2011. 2011.
    1. Hohl CM, Dankoff J, Colacone A, Afilalo M. Polypharmacy, adverse drug-related events, and potential adverse drug interactions in elderly patients presenting to an emergency department. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38:666–671. doi: 10.1067/mem.2001.119456.
    1. Schuur JD, Venkatesh AK. The growing role of emergency departments in hospital admissions. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:391–393. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1204431.
    1. Peddie D, Small SS. Designing an adverse drug event reporting system to prevent unintentional reexposures to harmful drugs: study protocol for a multiple methods design. JMIR Res Prot. 2016;5(3):e169. doi: 10.2196/resprot.5967.
    1. Bailey C, Peddie D, Wickham ME, Badke K, Small SS, Doyle-Waters MM, et al. Adverse drug event reporting systems: a systematic review. Brit J Clin Pharm. 2016;82(1):17–29. doi: 10.1111/bcp.12944.
    1. Hohl CM, Small SS. Why clinicians don’t report adverse drug events: qualitative study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2018;4(1):e21. doi: 10.2196/publichealth.9282.
    1. Peddie D, Small SS. Adverse drug event reporting from clinical care: mixed-methods analysis for a minimum required dataset. JMIR Med Inform. 2018;6(2):e10248. doi: 10.2196/10248.
    1. Chruscicki A, Badke K, Peddie D, Small S, Balka E, Hohl CM. Pilot-testing an adverse drug event reporting form prior to its implementation in an electronic health record. SpringerPlus. 2016;5(1):1764. doi: 10.1186/s40064-016-3382-z.
    1. Small SS, Hohl CM, Balka E. Organizational implications of implementing a new adverse drug event reporting system for care providers and integrating it with provincial health information systems. Healthc Manage Forum. 2019;32(4):208–212. doi: 10.1177/0840470419845384.
    1. Hohl C, Lexchin JR, Balka E. Can reporting of adverse drug reactions create safer systems while improving health data? CMAJ. 2015;187(11):789–790. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.150057.
    1. An Act to amend the Food and Drugs Act (Protecting Canadians from Unsafe Drugs Act, Vanessa’s Law) in Statutes of Canada 2014, Chapter 24, (2014). .
    1. Health Canada . Mandatory reporting of serious adverse drug reactions and medical device incidents by hospitals, guidance document. 2019.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Calculating proportion of days covered (PDC) for antihypertensive and antidiabetic medications: an evaluation guide for grantees: Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention - Evaluation Resources; 2015. .
    1. van der Linden CKC, Bijl A, Maas H, Egberts T, Jansen P. Represcription after adverse drug reaction in the elderly: a descriptive study. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:1666–1667. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.15.1666.
    1. Winick-Ng J, Richards L, Clemens K, Chariff S, Welk B. Data impact challenge II answer submission. 2016.
    1. Hohl CM, Badke K, Zhao A, Wickham ME, Woo SA, Sivilotti MLA, et al. Prospective validation of clinical criteria to identify emergency department patients at high risk for adverse drug events. Acad Emerg Med. 2018;25(9):1015–1026. doi: 10.1111/acem.13407.
    1. Hohl CM, Brubacher J, Hunte G, Wiens MO, Abu-Laban R, Singer J, et al. Clinical decision rules to improve the detection of adverse drug events in emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med. 2012;19:640–649. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2012.01379.x.
    1. Hohl CM, Partovi N, Ghement I, Wickham ME, McGrail K, Reddekopp LN, et al. Impact of early in-hospital medication review by clinical pharmacists on health services utilization. PLoS One. 2017;12(2):e0170495. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170495.
    1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans 2014. Available from: . Cited 2018 April 28.
    1. Ford I, Norrie J. Pragmatic trials. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(5):454–463. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1510059.
    1. Canadian Insitutes for Health Information . National ambulatory care reporting system emergency department visits and length of stay, 2016–2017. 2017.
    1. van der Linden CM, Jansen PA, Grouls RJ, van Marum RJ, Verberne MA, Aussems LM, et al. Systems that prevent unwanted represcription of drugs withdrawn because of adverse drug events: a systematic review. Ther Adv Drug Safe. 2013;4(2):73–90. doi: 10.1177/2042098613477125.
    1. Christopoulou SC, Kotsilieris T, Anagnostopoulos I. Assessment of health information technology interventions in evidence-based medicine: a systematic review by adopting a methodological evaluation framework. Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) 2018;6(3):109.
    1. Mc Cord KA, Ewald H, Ladanie A, Briel M, Speich B, Bucher HC, et al. Current use and costs of electronic health records for clinical trial research: a descriptive study. CMAJ Open. 2019;7(1):E23–e32. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20180096.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever