See the published version of this preprint at BMC Primary Care.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Patrick Redmond
King's College London
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3929-2018
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background
Medication error at transitions of care is common. The implementation of medicines reconciliation processes to improve this issue has been recommended by many regulatory and safety organisations.
Aim
The aim of this study was to gain insight from healthcare professionals on the barriers and facilitators to the medicines reconciliation implementation process.
Design Setting
Semi-structured interviews were conducted in Ireland with a wide range of healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved with medicines reconciliation at transitions of care.
Method
Thematic analysis was undertaken using an existing theoretical framework previously applied to implementation of medicines reconciliation.
Results and conclusion
Thirty-five participants were interviewed, including eleven community pharmacists (CPs), eight hospital pharmacists (HPs), nine hospital consultants (HCs), five general practitioners (GPs), and two non-consultant hospital doctors (NCHDs). Themes were categorized into barriers and facilitators. Barriers included resistance from existing professional cultures, staff interest and training, poor communication and minimal information and communications technology (ICT) support. Solutions (facilitators) suggested included supporting effective multidisciplinary teams, greater involvement of pharmacists in medicines reconciliation, ICT solutions (linked prescribing databases, decision support systems) and increased funding to provide additional (e.g. admission and discharge reconciliation) and more advanced services (e.g. community pharmacist delivered medicines use review). Medicines reconciliation is advocated as a solution to the known problem of medication error at transitions of care. This study identifies the key challenges and potential solutions that policy makers, managers and HCPs should consider when reviewing the practices and processes of medicines reconciliation in their own organisations.
Keywords
Medicines reconciliation, patient safety, qualitative research, health plan implementation, Continuity of Patient Care/organization & administration
Figure 1
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Primary Care.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 10 Jun, 2020
Editor assigned
On 02 Jun, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 01 Jun, 2020
Editor invited
On 01 Jun, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 28 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Apr, 2020
Version 1
Posted 25 Feb, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 04 Apr, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 03 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 26 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 23 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 23 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 23 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 16 Feb, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 15 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 15 Feb, 2020
First submitted
On 13 Feb, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Practice
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Primary Care.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Patrick Redmond
King's College London
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3929-2018
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Primary Care.
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 10 Jun, 2020
Editor assigned
On 02 Jun, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 01 Jun, 2020
Editor invited
On 01 Jun, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 28 May, 2020
Editor assigned
On 23 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 22 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 22 Apr, 2020
Version 1
Posted 25 Feb, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 04 Apr, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 03 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 26 Mar, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 26 Mar, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 23 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 23 Mar, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 23 Mar, 2020
Editor assigned
On 16 Feb, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 15 Feb, 2020
Editor invited
On 15 Feb, 2020
First submitted
On 13 Feb, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
General Practice
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Primary Care.
Background
Medication error at transitions of care is common. The implementation of medicines reconciliation processes to improve this issue has been recommended by many regulatory and safety organisations.
Aim
The aim of this study was to gain insight from healthcare professionals on the barriers and facilitators to the medicines reconciliation implementation process.
Design Setting
Semi-structured interviews were conducted in Ireland with a wide range of healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved with medicines reconciliation at transitions of care.
Method
Thematic analysis was undertaken using an existing theoretical framework previously applied to implementation of medicines reconciliation.
Results and conclusion
Thirty-five participants were interviewed, including eleven community pharmacists (CPs), eight hospital pharmacists (HPs), nine hospital consultants (HCs), five general practitioners (GPs), and two non-consultant hospital doctors (NCHDs). Themes were categorized into barriers and facilitators. Barriers included resistance from existing professional cultures, staff interest and training, poor communication and minimal information and communications technology (ICT) support. Solutions (facilitators) suggested included supporting effective multidisciplinary teams, greater involvement of pharmacists in medicines reconciliation, ICT solutions (linked prescribing databases, decision support systems) and increased funding to provide additional (e.g. admission and discharge reconciliation) and more advanced services (e.g. community pharmacist delivered medicines use review). Medicines reconciliation is advocated as a solution to the known problem of medication error at transitions of care. This study identifies the key challenges and potential solutions that policy makers, managers and HCPs should consider when reviewing the practices and processes of medicines reconciliation in their own organisations.
Figure 1
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...