Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 119–126 | Cite as

Analysis of drug-related problems in three departments of a German University hospital

  • Rebekka LenssenEmail author
  • Axel Heidenreich
  • Jörg B. Schulz
  • Christian Trautwein
  • Christina Fitzner
  • Ulrich Jaehde
  • Albrecht Eisert
Research Article

Abstract

Background

During the last decades, pharmaceutical care services have been developed and implemented to optimize drug therapies and ensure medication safety. To investigate the need for pharmaceutical care services, drug-related problems can be measured.

Objective

Thus, the aim of this study was to analyse number, type and occurrence of drug-related problems in different clinical departments.

Setting

A pharmaceutical care service was established on general wards in Urology, Neurology and Gastroenterology at the University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Germany.

Method

For each of a total of 306 patients, a pharmacist conducted an extended medication history, performed medication reconciliation, conducted medication safety checks and if drug-related problems were discovered, gave valid recommendations to the attending healthcare team. Drug-related problems were classified using the APS-Doc system. For statistical analyses, SAS® 9.1.3, SAS Institute, Cary NC, USA was applied. The project was approved by the local ethics committee.

Main outcome measure

Type, occurrence and frequency of DRP in different medical departments.

Results

On average, 2.3 drug-related problems per patient were documented for all three departments. Drug-related problems were found in each category of the APS-Doc system. The most pronounced drug-related problems found were drug–drug interactions (34.6 %). 37 % of the identified drug-related problems occurred before hospital admission, 27 % during transitional care, and 36 % on the ward. Subgroup analysis revealed specific drug-related problem patterns for each clinical department. The number of drug-related problems was found to be associated with the number of drugs and age.

Conclusion

Drug-related problems frequently occur in all investigated clinical departments. A holistic pharmaceutical care service could be an option to address this issue. In case of limited resources, individual drug-related problem patterns can be used as a basis for a tailored pharmaceutical care service. As number of drugs and age have been shown to be significant risk factors, it is crucial that the healthcare team including the pharmacist pays special attention to elderly patients and those with polymedication.

Keywords

Drug-related problems Gastroenterology Germany Medication safety Neurology Pharmaceutical care Urology Ward-based pharmacist 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Mary Joan Blümich and Niklas Lenssen for carefully reading and discussing the English version of the manuscript.

Funding

We gratefully thank the Apothekerstiftung Nordrhein, Duesseldorf and the Foerderinitiative Pharmazeutische Betreuung e.V., Berlin for funding this project.

Conflicts of interest

Authors have no conflict of interest with regard to this research.

References

  1. 1.
    Foundation Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe. The PCNE Classification V 6.2. 2010. http://www.pcne.org/working-groups/2/drug-related-problems. Accessed 14 April 2015.
  2. 2.
    Preslaski CR, Lat I, MacLaren R, Poston J. Pharmacist contributions as members of the multidisciplinary ICU team. Chest. 2013;144:1687–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    MacLaren R, Bond CA, Martin SJ, Fike D. Clinical and economic outcomes of involving pharmacists in the direct care of critically ill patients with infections. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:3184–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Clapp MD, Burdick E, Demonaco HJ, Erickson JI, et al. Pharmacist participation on physician rounds and adverse drug events in the intensive care unit. JAMA. 1999;282:267–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bond CA, Raehl CL, Franke T. Clinical pharmacy services and hospital mortality rates. Pharmacotherapy. 1999;19:556–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wu JY, Leung WY, Chang S, Lee B, Zee B, Tong PC, et al. Effectiveness of telephone counselling by a pharmacist in reducing mortality in patients receiving polypharmacy: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2006;333:522.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gillespie U, Alassaad A, Henrohn D, Garmo H, Hammarlund-Udenaes M, Toss H, et al. A comprehensive pharmacist intervention to reduce morbidity in patients 80 years or older: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169:894–900.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hellstrom LM, Bondesson A, Hoglund P, Midlov P, Holmdahl L, Rickhag E, et al. Impact of the Lund Integrated Medicines Management (LIMM) model on medication appropriateness and drug-related hospital revisits. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;67:741–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaboli PJ, Hoth AB, McClimon BJ, Schnipper JL. Clinical pharmacists and inpatient medical care: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:955–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stange D, Kriston L, von-Wolff A, Baehr M, Dartsch DC. Reducing cardiovascular medication complexity in a German university hospital: effects of a structured pharmaceutical management intervention on adherence. J Manag Care Pharm. 2013;19:396–407.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hohmann C, Neumann-Haefelin T, Klotz JM, Freidank A, Radziwill R. Drug-related problems in patients with ischemic stroke in hospital. Int J Clin Pharm. 2012;34:828–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liekweg A, Westfeld M, Braun M, Zivanovic O, Schink T, Kuhn W, et al. Pharmaceutical care for patients with breast and ovarian cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20:2669–77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kantelhardt P. Unterstützung ärztlicher Tätigkeiten-Welchen Beitrag leisten Krankenhausapotheker schon heute? Krankenhauspharmazie. 2009;30:201–5.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Langebrake C, Hilgarth H. Clinical pharmacists’ interventions in a German university hospital. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32:194–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hohmann C, Eickhoff C, Klotz JM, Schulz M, Radziwill R. Development of a classification system for drug-related problems in the hospital setting (APS-Doc) and assessment of the inter-rater reliability. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2012;37:276–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stokes ME, Davis CS, Koch GG. Categorical data analysis using the SAS system. 3rd ed. Cary: SAS institute; 2012.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical researchers. 1st ed. London: Chapman & Hall; 1991.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beckett RD, Crank CW, Wehmeyer A. Effectiveness and feasibility of pharmacist-led admission medication reconciliation for geriatric patients. J Pharm Pract. 2012;25:136–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Farley TM, Shelsky C, Powell S, Farris KB, Carter BL. Effect of clinical pharmacist intervention on medication discrepancies following hospital discharge. Int J Clin Pharm. 2014;36:430–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lau HS, Florax C, Porsius AJ, De Boer A. The completeness of medication histories in hospital medical records of patients admitted to general internal medicine wards. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2000;49:597–603.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vira T, Colquhoun M, Etchells E. Reconcilable differences: correcting medication errors at hospital admission and discharge. Qual Saf Health Care. 2006;15:122–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kraehenbuehl JM, Kremer B, Guignard B, Bugnon O. Practical evaluation of the drug-related problem management process in Swiss community pharmacies. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30:777–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nicolas A, Eickhoff C, Griese N, Schulz M. Drug-related problems in prescribed medicines in Germany at the time of dispensing. Int J Clin Pharm. 2013;35:476–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Blix HS, Viktil KK, Moger TA, Reikvam A. Characteristics of drug-related problems discussed by hospital pharmacists in multidisciplinary teams. Pharm World Sci. 2006;28:152–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lampert ML, Kraehenbuehl S, Hug BL. Drug-related problems: evaluation of a classification system in the daily practice of a Swiss University Hospital. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30:768–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schorr SG, Eickhoff C, Feldt S, Hohmann C, Schulz M. Exploring the potential impact of hospital ward-based pharmacy interns on drug safety. Pharmazie. 2014;69:316–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kjeldsen LJ, Clemmensen MH, Kronborg C, Hedegaard U, Larsen LH, Yderstraede IO, et al. Evaluation of a controlled, national collaboration study on a clinical pharmacy service of screening for risk medications. Int J Clin Pharm. 2014;36:368–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Viktil KK, Blix HS, Reikvam A, Moger TA, Hjemaas BJ, Walseth EK, et al. Comparison of drug-related problems in different patient groups. Ann Pharmacother. 2004;38:942–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nielsen TR, Andersen SE, Rasmussen M, Honore PH. Clinical pharmacist service in the acute ward. Int J Clin Pharm. 2013;35:1137–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hassan Y, Kassab Y. Abd Aziz N, Akram H, Ismail O. The impact of pharmacist-initiated interventions in improving acute coronary syndrome secondary prevention pharmacotherapy prescribing upon discharge. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2013;38:97–100.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Klopfer JD, Einarson TR. Acceptance of pharmacists’ suggestions by prescribers: a literature review. Hosp Pharm. 1990;25:830–2, 834–6.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kjeldsen LJ, Birkholm T, Fischer H, Graabaek T, Kibsdal KP, Ravn-Nielsen LV, et al. Characterization of drug-related problems identified by clinical pharmacy staff at Danish hospitals. Int J Clin Pharm. 2014;36:734–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stemer G, Lemmens-Gruber R. The clinical pharmacist’s contributions within the multidisciplinary patient care team of an intern nephrology ward. Int J Clin Pharm. 2011;33:759–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Goldberg RM, Mabee J, Chan L, Wong S. Drug-drug and drug-disease interactions in the ED: analysis of a high-risk population. Am J Emerg Med. 1996;14:447–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Leendertse AJ, Egberts AC, Stoker LJ, van den Bemt PM. Frequency of and risk factors for preventable medication-related hospital admissions in the Netherlands. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168:1890–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bates DW, Cullen DJ, Laird N, Petersen LA, Small SD, Servi D, et al. Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events. Implications for prevention. ADE Prevention Study Group. JAMA. 1995;274:29–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    WHO Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety. News release: the WHO collaborating centre on patient safety (Solutions), the world alliance for patient safety and the commonwealth fund, announce action on patient safety (High 5 s) Initiative, 2006. http://www.who.int/patientsafety/news/High_5_Release.pdf. Accessed 14 April 2015.
  38. 38.
    Kaboli P. Realizing the pharmacoeconomic benefit of clinical pharmacy. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008;65:1123.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    De Rijdt T, Willems L, Simoens S. Economic effects of clinical pharmacy interventions: a literature review. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008;65:1161–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij ter bevordering der Pharmacie 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rebekka Lenssen
    • 1
    • 2
    • 6
    Email author
  • Axel Heidenreich
    • 2
  • Jörg B. Schulz
    • 3
  • Christian Trautwein
    • 4
  • Christina Fitzner
    • 5
  • Ulrich Jaehde
    • 6
  • Albrecht Eisert
    • 1
  1. 1.Hospital PharmacyUniversity Hospital RWTH AachenAachenGermany
  2. 2.Department of UrologyUniversity Hospital RWTH AachenAachenGermany
  3. 3.Department of NeurologyUniversity Hospital RWTH AachenAachenGermany
  4. 4.Department of Internal Medicine III, Gastroenterology, Metabolic Disorders and Internal Intensive MedicineUniversity Hospital RWTH AachenAachenGermany
  5. 5.Department of Medical StatisticsRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  6. 6.Institute of Pharmacy, Clinical PharmacyUniversity of BonnBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations