AzTrials
AzTrials

Adverse Drug ReactionPITHNCT01906710

the Pharmacy Intervention Team Hospital-based (PITH) for People Study: Effect on Clinical and Economic Outcomes

A study testing integrated medicines management in people with Adverse Drug Reaction and Medication Administered in Error, run by Clementine CM Stuijt PharmD, MSc at 4 sites in Netherlands.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The purpose of this study is to determine whether a hospital pharmacy team (pharmacy technicians and pharmacists) together with (recently admitted) patients are able to diminish the number of drug related problems including adverse drug events, made before, during and after admissions resulting in reductions of… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
What is being tested?
integrated medicines management
Type of treatment
Pill or oral medicine
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
1,200 participants
Where
4 sitesNetherlands
Study dates
Jan 2013to Dec 2014
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • > three prescribed systemic drugs intended for chronic use at admission and discharge
  • an expected length of stay of 48 hours or longer
  • insured with the Dutch insurance company Agis/Achmea
  • patients or their carers are able to express themselves in Dutch or English

Who cannot join

  • scheduled chemotherapy
  • radiation therapy
  • transplantation
  • transfer from another hospital
  • transfer from another non-eligible ward within the same hospital
  • no informed consent has been signed
Show all 11Show fewer
  • a live expectancy less than 6 months
  • deceased during admission
  • inability to be counselled (e.g. cognitive dysfunction, language constraints)
  • discharge to a nursing home (presuming dependence on medication administration).
  • Patients will only be included once.

Trial locations and contacts

4 sites in 1 country.

CCM stuijt, PharmD contact

31633568067

stuijt@apomed.nl

Netherlands4 sites, 4 recruiting
  • Flevoziekenhuis

    Almere Stad, 1315 RA

    HT Ensing, PharmD, 31365454378, rensing@zorggroep-almere.nl

    M Zegstroo, pharm techn., 31368688537, mzegstroo@flevoziekenhuis.nl

    Recruiting
  • Sint Lucas Andreas Ziekenhuis

    Amsterdam

    MJA Janssen, PharmD, PhD, 0031205108911 ext. 319, m.j.a.janssen@slaz.nl

    MJA Janssen, PharmD, PhD

    Not yet recruiting
  • Medisch Centrum Leeuwarden

    Leeuwarden, 8901BR

    A Jansen, PharmD, 31582861295, anita.jansen@znb.nl

    Anita Jansen, PharmD

    Not yet recruiting
  • University Medical Centre

    Utrecht

    A de Roos, A.M.deRoos-2@umcutrecht.nl

    S v Lieshout-Bocxe, PharmD

    Recruiting

Other trials in Netherlands

About this study

Official title: The Effect of Patient Centered Medication Reconciliation, Medication Review and Discharge Counseling With Information Transfer in Hospitalized Patients on Clinical and Economic Parameters: a Multicentre, Before-after Study.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether a hospital pharmacy team (pharmacy technicians and pharmacists) together with (recently admitted) patients are able to diminish the number of drug related problems including adverse drug events, made before, during and after admissions resulting in reductions of re-hospitalizations and costs.

Read the detailed description

In its 2006 report "Preventing Medication Errors," the Institute of Medicine (IOM) estimated that more than 1.5 million adverse drug events (ADEs) occur annually in the United States. On average, every hospital patient is subjected to at least one medication error every day. Medication errors are a frequent cause of ADEs.

ADEs are usually defined as 'any injury due to medication use, including omission'. This may occur as an unavoidable result of the pharmacological action (better known as side effect or adverse drug reaction (ADR)) or by the manner the drug is applied (medication error or preventable ADE). ADEs can be regarded as the top of the iceberg containing all problems associated with drug therapy also known as Drug-Related Problems (DRPs). This means that besides ADEs, DRPs include other medication related problems like ADRs, medication errors, non-adherence and inadequate use of the medication by the patient. All these events can result in harm for the patient.

The wide variation of prevalence of ADEs found in the literature can be explained by differences in study setting, study population, outcome (ADRs, ADEs or both) and data collection method. Anticipating who will suffer an ADE, when, and from what medication is difficult. Research has not yet identified any valid predictors of the event. Patient characteristics currently are no useful predictors of an ADE because patients who have suffered ADEs are a non homogeneous group. Although older age, severity of illness, intensity of treatment, and poly-pharmacy have been associated with ADEs, no cause and effect relationship is known to exist between patients who suffer ADEs and age, comorbidity, or number of drugs received.

Around the time of hospitalization 15 to 72% of harmful events is attributed to ADEs and medication errors. ADEs are associated with substantial morbidity, increased mortality and longer length of stay in hospital and other direct costs. Nearly 1% (0,946) of patients who died during admission on an internal medicine department, were associated with the use of one or more drugs during this admission. Furthermore, a recent investigation among 21 Dutch hospitals by Hoonhout et al. revealed an excess length of stay of 6,2 days (95% CI 3.6,8.8) as a result of medication related adverse events. This figure is comparable to that of the American situation. Patients suffering from less severe ADEs (those that required a change in therapy or a longer hospital stay) had an average stay of 13 days, and patients who did not suffer an ADE had an average stay of 5 days.

As a result, common reasons for admission include avoidable ADEs. Gillespie et al. investigated the effect of a ward based pharmacist on hospital admissions amongst 80 year old patients and over. After 12 months the risk on medication related readmissions had been reduced in the intervention group with 80% OR 0.20 (95% CI 0.10, 0.41). However, the total number of readmission (including medication related) showed a very balanced outcome in both intervention and control group. Generally spoken, very few studies have shown a statistical significant impact of pharmacist intervention(s) on hospital readmission. Factors influencing (re) hospitalization are complex and comprise at least medical conditions and age. The pharmacist has shown to be very effective in reducing the number of DRPs and ADEs but only few studies have established an effect on healthcare utilization so far. A recent Cochrane review on discharge planning revealed that a structured discharge plan tailored to the individual patient probably brings about small reductions in hospital length of stay and readmission rates for older people admitted to hospital. This is in line with the results of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement survey: a multi faceted program comprising close coordination of care in the post-acute period, early post-discharge follow-up, enhanced patient education and self-management training, reduced the number of rehospitalizations.

For that reason we designed a multifaceted program comprising a series of interventions: on admission, during hospital stay and at discharge counseling and information transfer for other healthcare professionals.

Key in this intervention process is medication reconciliation. Medication reconciliation is described as the "process of obtaining a complete and accurate list of each patient's current home medications-including name, dosage, frequency, and route of administration-and comparing the physician's admission, transfer, and/or discharge orders to that list", with the goal to provide the patients correct medications. The Joint Commission International (JCI), accrediting authority of World Health Organization (WHO) has mandated medication reconciliation as a key towards reduction of medications errors related to transition in healthcare settings. In line with overseas regulations, Dutch authorities have commanded a comparable protocol since January 2011.

Pharmacy driven medication reconciliation interventions are often practised by (clinical) pharmacists and trained technicians. The efficacy of these interventions is assessed in various constitutions of teams: only technicians or only pharmacists and in-between these forms as well as in ambulatory and hospital setting. Many of these studies were found to be successful regarding significant reduction in medication errors and impact on clinical outcome. Other settings, with small samples and interventions particular without transition of information, appeared to be less flourishing specifically regarding economic outcomes. Interestingly, although the Dutch authorities have mandated medication reconciliation as an obligatory part of healthcare, few studies have been performed to measure the effect of this intervention.

Therefore, effects of interventions of a hospital based pharmacy team on number of unplanned re-hospitalizations and ADEs or frequency of medication related harms as a result of ADEs, are mixed or unknown. Furthermore, no studies have addressed the extent to which ADRs and ADEs amongst both acutely and electively admitted patients can be detected and diminished by pharmacists. Also, very limited data exist regarding differences in prevalence of ADRs and ADEs between study wards. It thus appears that these subjects still have to be addressed.

Therefore, a study is performed to establish the impact of a hospital pharmacy team on number and economic impact of unplanned re-hospitalizations. To determine independent contributions of various factors to the primary endpoint, age, sex, Charlson Co-morbidity index,renal function, hospital site, ward type, being admitted 6 months before index admission, quality of live (EuroQoL D5), culture on the ward, patient and healthcare professionals satisfaction and use of high risk drugs will be included in the logistic regression analysis. Also, occurence of DRPs and ADEs, with a focus on reduction of the frequency of ADEs and time spend by the pharmacy team with subsequent costs per prevented ADE and DRP as compared to usual pharmaceutical care will be calculated. Other healthcare uses like emergency department visits, length of stay, general practitioner consultations and drug consumption during post discharge period will be studied.

The research questions are:

  • Does the introduction of protocolised medication reconciliation and discharge service by a hospital pharmacy team influence the number of unplanned re-hospitalizations and ADEs?
  • What DRPs occur and how often do DRPs occur? Which DRPs are highly correlated with unplanned readmissions and ADEs?
  • Does the introduction of protocolised medication reconciliation by a hospital pharmacy team influence insurance costs caused by reduction of length of hospital stay, number of unplanned re-hospitalizations or readmissions, emergency visits, general practitioner visits, direct medicine cost within 14 days, 3 and 6 months after index admission? Can we extract from this information what the costs are per prevented ADE?
  • Is the satisfaction with information about medicines of included patients changed compared to control?
  • Is the satisfaction with the introduction of a pharmaceutical team for medication reconciliation of healthcare professionals changed compared to control?
  • Which patients or circumstances are at high risk for DRP or ADEs?
  • What is the time spend on patient centred medication reconciliation, discharge counselling, intermediate medication review?

Design A multi - centre prospective, before-after study will be performed. Each of the 4-6 participating centers have selected a predefined ward, namely emergency department, internal medicine, neurology, surgery, or cardiology. Per ward type 300 patients are planned to be included, comprising both before- and after period. Thus, 150 patients per arm per ward are included.

First, over a 3 to 4 month period baseline assessments in each hospital in the participating wards will be performed (control or usual care group). Secondly, the intervention is implemented on all included study wards, after a brief education of hospital pharmacy teams. Finally, during the 3 to 4 months intervention phase, patients are included. Both groups have a follow-up period of 6 months.

Being tested
integrated medicines management
Keywords
Adverse Drug Events, Drug related problems, Medication Reconciliation, Medication review, discharge counseling, Hospital Pharmacy based, integrated medicines management, patient safety
Medical subject headings
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • integrated medicines managementOther

    PITH includes the following interventions:

    1. MR on admission to obtain an up-to-date medication list, B) Intermediate medication review during hospitalization C) MR at discharge to maintain an up-to-date medication overview, counseling of the patient at hospital discharge and preparation of the patient to manage their medication at home., Written material is provided for oral support, which includes an overview of the current medication, a summary of potentially important side effects, advices on medication use and hospital pharmacy contact information in order to answer any possible questions, D) Information transfer to GP/community pharmacist at discharge
Study groups in NCT01906710
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
usual carePlacebo comparatorDuring admission patients receive standard, non - ward based, pharmaceutical care from a pharmacy team in taking responsibility for the appropriate, safe and cost-effective use of medication from a central hospital pharmacy. The pharmaceutical care consist of daily screening of generated alerts by the Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system and consultation by phone. Dependent on the local situation the current medication reconciliation process is being performed by nursing and/or medical staff either protocolised or not.
integrated medicines managementActive comparatorintegrated medicines management consists of * patient centred medication reconciliation * intermediate medication review * discharge counseling * transfer of information to primary care
Receives: Other: integrated medicines management

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. number of rehospitalizations

    this objective will be measured in three different ways: by National data extraction from hospitals (including ED visits and re-hospitalizations) as well as supporting insurance company, and by patient diaries.

    Measured: 6 months

  2. number of rehospitalizations

    this objective will be measured in three different ways: by National data extraction from hospitals (including ED visits and re-hospitalizations) as well as supporting insurance company, and by patient diaries.

    Measured: 14 days

  3. number of rehospitalizations

    this objective will be measured in three different ways: by National data extraction from hospitals (including ED visits and re-hospitalizations) as well as supporting insurance company, and by patient diaries.

    Measured: 42 days

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. numbers of ADEs

    PAtients are contacted by phone. Possible ADEs are scored using a trigger list, developed by Schnipper et al, containing possible red flags on symptoms that might include alarming adverse drug reactions or deterioration of the clinical situation. In order to assess the presence of a preventable ADE, an independent team of an experienced pharmacist and a physician assesses ADEs.

    Measured: 14 days after discharge

  2. numbers of DRPs

    For each patient potential DRPs will be explored with a list of combined triggers based on explicit criteria extracted from literature e.g. Morimoto et al., Start and STOPP criteria and Acove in combination with a protocol based on the Harm- Wrestling report developed by the Royal Dutch Pharmaceutical Society (KNMP) in conjunction with the Healthcare Department, is used.

    Measured: on admission at discharge

  3. cost per prevented re-hospitalization

    Measured: 6 months

  4. general health care use

    cost like general practitioner visits, emergency department visits are extracted from insurance company data.

    Measured: 6 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted24 Jul 2013 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2013
  3. Primary completionDec 2013 (estimated)
  4. Study completionDec 2014 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Non-randomised
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
1,200 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01906710
Sponsor's protocol ID
ACHMEA-39435
Acronym
PITH
Status last verified
Jul 2013
First submitted
17 Jul 2013
Last updated
24 Jul 2013
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Using medication reconciliation to prevent errors. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2006 Apr;32(4):230-2. doi: 10.1016/s1553-7250(06)32030-2. No abstract available.

    PubMed 16649655
  • Gillespie U, Alassaad A, Henrohn D, Garmo H, Hammarlund-Udenaes M, Toss H, Kettis-Lindblad A, Melhus H, Morlin C. A comprehensive pharmacist intervention to reduce morbidity in patients 80 years or older: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2009 May 11;169(9):894-900. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.71.

    PubMed 19433702
  • Vira T, Colquhoun M, Etchells E. Reconcilable differences: correcting medication errors at hospital admission and discharge. Qual Saf Health Care. 2006 Apr;15(2):122-6. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2005.015347.

    PubMed 16585113
  • Terceros Y, Chahine-Chakhtoura C, Malinowski JE, Rickley WF. Impact of a pharmacy resident on hospital length of stay and drug-related costs. Ann Pharmacother. 2007 May;41(5):742-8. doi: 10.1345/aph.1H603. Epub 2007 Apr 17.

    PubMed 17440008
  • Shepperd S, McClaran J, Phillips CO, Lannin NA, Clemson LM, McCluskey A, Cameron ID, Barras SL. Discharge planning from hospital to home. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD000313. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000313.pub3.

    PubMed 20091507
  • Scullin C, Scott MG, Hogg A, McElnay JC. An innovative approach to integrated medicines management. J Eval Clin Pract. 2007 Oct;13(5):781-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00753.x.

    PubMed 17824872
  • Scullin C, Hogg A, Luo R, Scott MG, McElnay JC. Integrated medicines management - can routine implementation improve quality? J Eval Clin Pract. 2012 Aug;18(4):807-15. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01682.x. Epub 2011 Apr 19.

    PubMed 21504517
  • Schnipper JL, Kirwin JL, Cotugno MC, Wahlstrom SA, Brown BA, Tarvin E, Kachalia A, Horng M, Roy CL, McKean SC, Bates DW. Role of pharmacist counseling in preventing adverse drug events after hospitalization. Arch Intern Med. 2006 Mar 13;166(5):565-71. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.5.565.

    PubMed 16534045
  • Rommers MK, Teepe-Twiss IM, Guchelaar HJ. Preventing adverse drug events in hospital practice: an overview. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007 Oct;16(10):1129-35. doi: 10.1002/pds.1440.

    PubMed 17610221
  • Nickerson A, MacKinnon NJ, Roberts N, Saulnier L. Drug-therapy problems, inconsistencies and omissions identified during a medication reconciliation and seamless care service. Healthc Q. 2005;8 Spec No:65-72. doi: 10.12927/hcq..17667.

    PubMed 16334075
  • Murphy EM, Oxencis CJ, Klauck JA, Meyer DA, Zimmerman JM. Medication reconciliation at an academic medical center: implementation of a comprehensive program from admission to discharge. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2009 Dec 1;66(23):2126-31. doi: 10.2146/ajhp080552.

    PubMed 19923314
  • Meyer-Massetti C, Cheng CM, Schwappach DL, Paulsen L, Ide B, Meier CR, Guglielmo BJ. Systematic review of medication safety assessment methods. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2011 Feb 1;68(3):227-40. doi: 10.2146/ajhp100019.

    PubMed 21258028
  • Kongkaew C, Noyce PR, Ashcroft DM. Hospital admissions associated with adverse drug reactions: a systematic review of prospective observational studies. Ann Pharmacother. 2008 Jul;42(7):1017-25. doi: 10.1345/aph.1L037. Epub 2008 Jul 1.

    PubMed 18594048
  • Karapinar-Carkit F, Borgsteede SD, Zoer J, Smit HJ, Egberts AC, van den Bemt PM. Effect of medication reconciliation with and without patient counseling on the number of pharmaceutical interventions among patients discharged from the hospital. Ann Pharmacother. 2009 Jun;43(6):1001-10. doi: 10.1345/aph.1L597. Epub 2009 Jun 2.

    PubMed 19491320
  • Hoonhout LH, de Bruijne MC, Wagner C, Zegers M, Waaijman R, Spreeuwenberg P, Asscheman H, van der Wal G, van Tulder MW. Direct medical costs of adverse events in Dutch hospitals. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Feb 9;9:27. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-27.

    PubMed 19203365

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing integrated medicines management in people with Adverse Drug Reaction and Medication Administered in Error, run by Clementine CM Stuijt PharmD, MSc at 4 sites in Netherlands.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 11 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Jul 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 4 sites in Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact CCM stuijt, PharmD (31633568067, stuijt@apomed.nl), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

number of rehospitalizations (time frame: 6 months). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01906710, which also lists 19 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Jul 2013.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in