↓ Skip to main content

The effect of a medication reconciliation program in two intensive care units in the Netherlands: a prospective intervention study with a before and after design

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
Title
The effect of a medication reconciliation program in two intensive care units in the Netherlands: a prospective intervention study with a before and after design
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13613-018-0361-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liesbeth B. E. Bosma, Nicole G. M. Hunfeld, Rogier A. M. Quax, Edmé Meuwese, Piet H. G. J. Melief, Jasper van Bommel, SiokSwan Tan, Maaike J. van Kranenburg, Patricia M. L. A. van den Bemt

Abstract

Medication errors occur frequently in the intensive care unit (ICU) and during care transitions. Chronic medication is often temporarily stopped at the ICU. Unfortunately, when the patient improves, the restart of this medication is easily forgotten. Moreover, temporal ICU medication is often unintentionally continued after ICU discharge. Medication reconciliation could be useful to prevent such errors. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the effect of medication reconciliation at the ICU. This prospective 8-month study with a pre- and post-design was carried out in two ICU settings in the Netherlands. Patients were included when they used ≥ 1 chronic medicine and when the ICU stay exceeded 24 h. The intervention consisted of medication reconciliation by pharmacists at the moment of ICU admission and prior to ICU discharge. Medication transfer errors (MTEs) were collected and the severity of potential harm of these MTEs was measured, based on a potential adverse drug event score (pADE = 0; 0.01; 0.1; 0.4; 0.6). Primary outcome measures were the proportions of patients with ≥ 1 MTE at ICU admission and after discharge. Secondary outcome measures were the proportions of patients with a pADE score ≥ 0.01 due to these MTEs, the severity of the pADEs and the associated costs. Odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals were calculated, by using a multivariate logistic regression analysis. In the pre-intervention phase, 266 patients were included and 212 in the post-intervention phase. The proportion of patients with ≥ 1 MTE at ICU admission was reduced from 45.1 to 14.6% (ORadj 0.18 [95% CI 0.11-0.30]) and after discharge from 73.9 to 41.2% (ORadj 0.24 [95% CI 0.15-0.37]). The proportion of patients with a pADE ≥ 0.01 at ICU admission was reduced from 34.8 to 8.0% (ORadj 0.13 [95% CI 0.07-0.24]) and after discharge from 69.5 to 36.2% (ORadj 0.26 [95% CI 0.17-0.40]). The pADE reduction resulted in a potential net cost-benefit of € 103 per patient. Medication reconciliation by pharmacists at ICU transfers is an effective safety intervention, leading to a significant decrease in the number of MTE and a cost-effective reduction in potential harm. Trial registration Dutch trial register: NTR4159, 5 September 2013, retrospectively registered.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Student > Master 12 12%
Other 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 35 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 25 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 39 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 May 2019.
All research outputs
#6,307,652
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#586
of 1,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,540
of 437,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#20
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 437,851 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.