Title |
The PHARMS (Patient Held Active Record of Medication Status) feasibility study: a research proposal
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Research Notes, January 2018
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13104-017-3118-3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Elaine Walsh, Laura J. Sahm, Patricia M. Kearney, Henry Smithson, David M. Kerins, Chrys Ngwa, Ciara Fitzgerald, Stephen Mc Carthy, Eimear Connolly, Kieran Dalton, Derina Byrne, Megan Carey, Colin Bradley |
Abstract |
Medication errors are a major source of preventable morbidity, mortality and cost and many occur at the times of hospital admission and discharge. Novel interventions (such as new methods of recording medication information and conducting medication reconciliation) are required to facilitate accurate transfer of medication information. With existing evidence supporting the use of information technology and the patient representing the one constant in the care process, an electronic patient held medication record may provide a solution. This study will assess the feasibility of introducing a patient held electronic medication record in primary and secondary care using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).This feasibility study is a mixed method study of community dwelling older adult patients admitted to an urban secondary care facility comprising a non-randomised intervention and qualitative interviews with key stakeholders. Outcomes of interest include clinical outcomes and process evaluation.This study will yield insights pertaining to feasibility, acceptability and participation for a more definitive evaluation of the intervention. The study also has the potential to contribute to knowledge of implementation of technology in a healthcare context and to the broader area of implementation science. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Ireland | 16 | 70% |
Australia | 1 | 4% |
United Arab Emirates | 1 | 4% |
Unknown | 5 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 18 | 78% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 17% |
Scientists | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 103 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 14 | 14% |
Student > Master | 14 | 14% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 9% |
Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
Other | 6 | 6% |
Other | 19 | 18% |
Unknown | 33 | 32% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 21% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 16% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 7% |
Psychology | 4 | 4% |
Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
Other | 15 | 15% |
Unknown | 35 | 34% |