↓ Skip to main content

Reducing medication errors at admission: 3 cycles to implement, improve and sustain medication reconciliation

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Reducing medication errors at admission: 3 cycles to implement, improve and sustain medication reconciliation
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, December 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11096-014-0047-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Niccolo Curatolo, Loriane Gutermann, Niaz Devaquet, Sandrine Roy, André Rieutord

Abstract

Background In France, medication errors are the third leading cause of serious adverse events. Many studies have shown the positive impact of medication reconciliation (MR) on reducing medication errors at admission but this practice is still rarely implemented in French hospitals. Objective Implement and sustain a MR process at admission in two surgery units. The quality improvement approach used to meet this objective is described. Setting The gastrointestinal surgery and orthopedic surgery departments of a 407 inpatient bed French teaching hospital Methods A step by step collaborative approach based on plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles. Three cycles were successively performed with regular feedback during multidisciplinary meetings. Main outcome measure: mean unintended medication discrepancies (UMDs) per patients at admission. Results The three PDSA cycles and the monitoring phase allowed to implement, optimize and sustain a MR process in the two surgery units. Cycle 1, by showing a rate of 0.65 UMDs at admission (95 % CI 0.39-0.91), underlined the need for a MR process; cycle 2 showed how the close-collaboration between pharmacy and surgery units could help to reduce mean UMDs per patients at admission (0.18; 95 % CI 0.09-0.27) (p < 0.001); finally, cycle 3 allowed the optimization of the MR process by reducing the delays of the best possible medication history availability. Conclusions This work highlights how a collaborative quality-improvement approach based on PDSA cycles can meet the challenge of implementing MR to improve medication management at admission.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Postgraduate 8 13%
Other 7 11%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 31%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 15 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 10 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2014.
All research outputs
#20,245,139
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#1,010
of 1,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#302,275
of 360,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#11
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,079 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.