Impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care on in-patients' medication safety: study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial (MEDREV study)

Géraldine Leguelinel-Blache, Christel Castelli, Clarisse Roux-Marson, Sophie Bouvet, Sandrine Andrieu, Philippe Cestac, Rémy Collomp, Paul Landais, Bertrice Loulière, Christelle Mouchoux, Rémi Varin, Benoit Allenet, MEDREV Working Group, Pierrick Bedouch, Jean-Marie Kinowski, Géraldine Leguelinel-Blache, Christel Castelli, Clarisse Roux-Marson, Sophie Bouvet, Sandrine Andrieu, Philippe Cestac, Rémy Collomp, Paul Landais, Bertrice Loulière, Christelle Mouchoux, Rémi Varin, Benoit Allenet, MEDREV Working Group, Pierrick Bedouch, Jean-Marie Kinowski

Abstract

Background: Clinical pharmaceutical care has long played an important role in the improvement of healthcare safety. Pharmaceutical care is a collaborative care approach, implicating all the actors of the medication circuit in order to prevent and correct drug-related problems that can lead to adverse drug events. The collaborative pharmaceutical care performed during patients' hospitalization requires two mutually reinforcing activities: medication reconciliation and medication review. Until now, the impact of the association of these two activities has not been clearly studied.

Methods: This is a multicentric stepped wedge randomized study involving six care units from six French University Hospitals (each unit corresponding to a cluster) over seven consecutive 14-day periods. Each hospital unit will start with a control period and switch to an experimental period after a randomized number of 14-day periods. Patients aged at least 65 years hospitalized in one of the participating care units and having given their consent to be called for a 30-day and 90-day follow-up can be enrolled. For each 14-day period, 15 patients will be recruited in each care unit to obtain a total of 630 patients enrolled in all centers. Patients with a hospital stay of more than 21 days will be excluded. During the control period, there will be no clinical pharmacist in the care unit, whereas during the experimental period a clinical pharmacist will perform medication reconciliation and review with the healthcare team. The primary outcome will assess the impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care on preventable medication error rate. The secondary outcomes will evaluate the clinical impact of the strategy, the acceptance rate of pharmaceutical interventions, the induced and avoided costs of the strategy (cost-consequence analysis), and the healthcare team's satisfaction.

Discussion: This study will assess the impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care associating medication reconciliation and review at patient admission to hospital in terms of preventable medication error rate and costs. This activity will prevent and correct medication errors arising earlier in the hospitalization.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02598115 . Registered on 4 November 2015.

Keywords: Drug safety; Drug-related problem; Hospital pharmacist; Medication reconciliation; Medication review; Pharmaceutical care; Stepped wedge study.

Conflict of interest statement

Authors’ information

GLB, CC, CRM, PC: co-investigator, member of the monitoring committee. SB: biostatistician. SA: member of the scientific committee, vice-president of the French Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology. RC: co-investigator, member of the monitoring committee, vice-president of SFPC. PL: member of the scientific committee, head of the clinical research department. BL: member of the scientific committee, MED’REC French coordinator. RV: member of the scientific committee, president of SFPC. BA: responsible for the scientific committee, president of the scientific committee of SFPC. MEDREV Working Group: participating health professionals. PB: member of the monitoring committee. JMK: member of the scientific committee, principal investigator.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Nîmes University Hospital Center is the promoter and is responsible for all the administrative measures. The local ethics committee (the Third Southern Mediterranean Protection to Persons Committee) approved the study for all centers. According to French law, all the patients or their legal representative will be verbally informed during the inclusion visit and will receive an information form. The patient can refuse to participate at any time. The French committees for data handling (Advisory Committee on Information Processing in Material Research in the Field of Health and National Commission on Computer Technology and Freedom) approved the study. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT02598115 on 4 November 2015: Impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care on hospital admission drug prescriptions for patients 65 years of age and older (MEDREV)).

Any substantial change is subject to a written amendment submitted to the promoter, who must obtain a favorable opinion from the PPC and an authorization from the competent authority before implementation. All amendments to the protocol must be made known to all investigators involved in the research.

Consent for publication

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
MEDREV study design
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Standard Protocol Items: Recommendation for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) figure. * X is 1–21 days. ** Y is a period after the end of the post-discharge follow-up. *** Interventional period. **** Observational period. AMO admission medication order, BPMH best possible medication history
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
MEDREV study - flow of the intervention. BPMH, best possible medication history

References

    1. Michel P, Lathelize M, Quenon JL, Bru-Sonnet R, Domecq S, Kret M. [Comparison of two National Studies on Severe Adverse Events induced by healthcare conducted in 2004 and 2009. Final Report by DREES (Health Ministry). 2011. . Accessed Oct 2012.
    1. Apretna E, Haramburu F, Taboulet F, Bégaud B. [Medical and socio-economical impact of drug-induced adverse reactions] Presse Medicale Paris Fr 1983. 2005;34(4):271–6.
    1. Tam VC, Knowles SR, Cornish PL, Fine N, Marchesano R, Etchells EE. Frequency, type and clinical importance of medication history errors at admission to hospital: a systematic review. CMAJ Can Med Assoc J. 2005;173(5):510–5. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.045311.
    1. Hellström LM, Bondesson Å, Höglund P, Eriksson T. Errors in medication history at hospital admission: prevalence and predicting factors. BMC Clin Pharmacol. 2012;12:9. doi: 10.1186/1472-6904-12-9.
    1. Vira T, Colquhoun M, Etchells E. Reconcilable differences: correcting medication errors at hospital admission and discharge. Qual Saf Health Care. 2006;15(2):122–6. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2005.015347.
    1. Gleason KM, Groszek JM, Sullivan C, Rooney D, Barnard C, Noskin GA. Reconciliation of discrepancies in medication histories and admission orders of newly hospitalized patients. Am J Health-Syst Pharm AJHP Off J Am Soc Health-Syst Pharm. 2004;61(16):1689–95.
    1. Page RL, Ruscin JM. The risk of adverse drug events and hospital-related morbidity and mortality among older adults with potentially inappropriate medication use. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2006;4(4):297–305. doi: 10.1016/j.amjopharm.2006.12.008.
    1. Passarelli MCG, Jacob-Filho W, Figueras A. Adverse drug reactions in an elderly hospitalised population: inappropriate prescription is a leading cause. Drugs Aging. 2005;22(9):767–77. doi: 10.2165/00002512-200522090-00005.
    1. Trivalle C, Cartier T, Verny C, Mathieu A-M, Davrinche P, Agostini H, et al. Identifying and preventing adverse drug events in elderly hospitalised patients: a randomised trial of a program to reduce adverse drug effects. J Nutr Health Aging. 2010;14(1):57–61. doi: 10.1007/s12603-010-0010-4.
    1. Lehnbom EC, Stewart MJ, Manias E, Westbrook JI. Impact of medication reconciliation and review on clinical outcomes. Ann Pharmacother. 2014;48(10):1298–312. doi: 10.1177/1060028014543485.
    1. Leguelinel-Blache G, Arnaud F, Bouvet S, Dubois F, Castelli C, Roux-Marson C, et al. Impact of admission medication reconciliation performed by clinical pharmacists on medication safety. Eur J Intern Med. 2014;25(9):808–14. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2014.09.012.
    1. Mergenhagen KA, Blum SS, Kugler A, Livote EE, Nebeker JR, Ott MC, et al. Pharmacist- versus physician-initiated admission medication reconciliation: impact on adverse drug events. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2012;10(4):242–50. doi: 10.1016/j.amjopharm.2012.06.001.
    1. Pal A, Babbott S, Wilkinson ST. Can the targeted use of a discharge pharmacist significantly decrease 30-day readmissions? Hosp Pharm. 2013;48(5):380–8. doi: 10.1310/hpj4805-380.
    1. Villanyi D, Fok M, Wong RYM. Medication reconciliation: identifying medication discrepancies in acutely ill hospitalized older adults. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2011;9(5):339–44. doi: 10.1016/j.amjopharm.2011.07.005.
    1. National Health Institute of United Kingdom. Clinical Medication review: A Practice Guide. 2013. . Accessed Oct 2014.
    1. Christensen M, Lundh A. Medication review in hospitalised patients to reduce morbidity and mortality. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2:CD008986.
    1. O’Mahony D, O’Sullivan D, Byrne S, O’Connor MN, Ryan C, Gallagher P. STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: version 2. Age Ageing. 2015;44(2):213–8. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afu145.
    1. Lang P-O, Boland B, Dalleur O. Prescribing inappropriate medication: the new STOPP/START criteria. Rev Med Suisse. 2015;11(494):2115–23.
    1. By the American Geriatrics Society 2015 Beers Criteria Update Expert Panel. American Geriatrics Society 2015 updated Beers criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015;63(11):2227–46.
    1. Spinewine A, Dumont C, Mallet L, Swine C. Medication appropriateness index: reliability and recommendations for future use. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006;54(4):720–2. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2006.00668_8.x.
    1. Egger SS, Bachmann A, Hubmann N, Schlienger RG, Krähenbühl S. Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use in elderly patients: comparison between general medical and geriatric wards. Drugs Aging. 2006;23(10):823–37. doi: 10.2165/00002512-200623100-00005.
    1. Gallagher PF, O’Connor MN, O’Mahony D. Prevention of potentially inappropriate prescribing for elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial using STOPP/START criteria. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;89(6):845–54. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2011.44.
    1. Récoché I, Lebaudy C, Cool C, Sourdet S, Piau A, Lapeyre-Mestre M, et al. Potentially inappropriate prescribing in a population of frail elderly people. Int J Clin Pharm. 2017;39(1):113–9. doi: 10.1007/s11096-016-0406-2.
    1. Hamilton H, Gallagher P, Ryan C, Byrne S, O’Mahony D. Potentially inappropriate medications defined by STOPP criteria and the risk of adverse drug events in older hospitalized patients. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(11):1013–9. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.215.
    1. Scullin C, Scott MG, Hogg A, McElnay JC. An innovative approach to integrated medicines management. J Eval Clin Pract. 2007;13(5):781–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00753.x.
    1. Slee A, Farrar K, Hughes D, Constable S. Optimising medical treatment: how pharmacist-acquired medication histories have a positive impact on patient care. Pharm J. 2006;277:737–9.
    1. Bergqvist M, Ulfvarson J, Karlsson EA. Nurse-led medication reviews and the quality of drug treatment of elderly hospitalized patients. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;65(11):1089–96. doi: 10.1007/s00228-009-0728-2.
    1. Malet-Larrea A, Goyenechea E, Gastelurrutia MA, Calvo B, García-Cárdenas V, Cabases JM, et al. Cost analysis and cost-benefit analysis of a medication review with follow-up service in aged polypharmacy patients. Eur J Health Econ HEPAC Health Econ Prev Care. 2017;18:1069–78. doi: 10.1007/s10198-016-0853-7.
    1. Gallagher J, O’Sullivan D, McCarthy S, Gillespie P, Woods N, O’Mahony D, et al. Structured pharmacist review of medication in older hospitalised patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Drugs Aging. 2016;33(4):285–94. doi: 10.1007/s40266-016-0348-3.
    1. Quélennec B, Beretz L, Paya D, Blicklé JF, Gourieux B, Andrès E, et al. Potential clinical impact of medication discrepancies at hospital admission. Eur J Intern Med. 2013;24(6):530–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2013.02.007.
    1. National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention. About medication errors. . Accessed Oct 2013.
    1. Gleason KM, McDaniel MR, Feinglass J, Baker DW, Lindquist L, Liss D, et al. Results of the Medications At Transitions and Clinical Handoffs (MATCH) study: an analysis of medication reconciliation errors and risk factors at hospital admission. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(5):441–7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1256-6.
    1. North Carolina Board of Pharmacy, the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy Foundation. NC Board Pharm News. 2012;34(2). [Available at: ] Accessed October 2014.
    1. Trivalle C and Ducimetière P. [Adverse drug events: A geriatric risk score]. Neurolpsychiatrgériatr. 2013;13:101–106.
    1. The WHO High 5 s Project. Standard Operating Protocol. Assuring medication accuracy at transitions in care: medication reconciliation. . Accessed Oct 2014.
    1. Laroche M-L, Charmes J-P, Merle L. Potentially inappropriate medications in the elderly: a French consensus panel list. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63(8):725–31. doi: 10.1007/s00228-007-0324-2.
    1. French Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology. Guidelines for medication prescription adapted to elderly. . Accessed Oct 2014.
    1. Allenet B, Bedouch P, Rose F-X, Escofier L, Roubille R, Charpiat B, et al. Validation of an instrument for the documentation of clinical pharmacists’ interventions. Pharm World Sci PWS. 2006;28(4):181–8. doi: 10.1007/s11096-006-9027-5.
    1. Hussey MA, Hughes JP. Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007;28(2):182–91. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2006.05.007.
    1. Campbell MJ, Donner A, Klar N. Developments in cluster randomized trials and statistics in medicine. Statist Med. 2007;26:2–19. doi: 10.1002/sim.2731.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera