For each patient, the clinical team were asked which (if any) sources of information about medication they had checked within 24h, 3days and 1week of selleck chemicals admission to hospital, and whether any of these sources identified
a discrepancy (i.e. yielded information that was different from that obtained from the initial Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical or primary source). Members of the clinical team were also asked whether a pharmacist and/or medicines management technician had been involved in medicines reconciliation and, if so, how long after admission this had taken place. The clinical records were then cross-checked to determine whether the actions taken by the clinical team Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical were documented, providing a measure of whether what was written accurately reflected what was done. Finally, clinical teams were given the option of giving narrative accounts of any discrepancies found during the process of medicines reconciliation. The primary purpose of this additional data collection was to inform
discussion within Trusts and individual clinical teams of the nature of medicines reconciliation errors locally, and not to generate national data that would be suitable for methodologically robust qualitative review. Data were collected using SNAP (electronic survey software), Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical and stored and analysed using SPSS. Each Trust was subsequently provided Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical with a customized audit report that contained: the national findings; their
overall performance in relation to the standards benchmarked against other participating Trusts and the total national sample; and, finally, the performance of each clinical team Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical in that Trust benchmarked against the Trust as a whole and the total national sample. Each participating Trust was identified by a numerical code known only to that Trust and POMH-UK. POMH-UK did not have access to the key to team codes. Trusts were also provided with customized slide sets to facilitate local dissemination of the audit findings, and an Excel file containing their own data for further local analysis if desired. A re-audit of clinical practice, using the same data collection tool and methods as at baseline, was conducted 16 months Entinostat later (June 2010). Results Questionnaire A total of 45 Trusts submitted a completed questionnaire describing the status and content of their medicines reconciliation policy. Out of these, 21 Trusts had an approved stand-alone policy for medicines reconciliation, 4 had included medicines reconciliation as part of a policy that had a wider scope, 11 had a policy in draft form and the remaining 9 did not have a policy in any form.
Related posts:
- First, the patients were asked
to perform the movement, “ - The call workers systematically asked ambulance callers for infor
- Drug allocation was according to patient preference in discussion
- These results, in addition to other pre clinical and clinical dat
- Supportive Patient-Practitioner Relationships May Benefit Patients