Improving Patient Safety in Medication Management by Medication Reconciliation and Pharmaceutical Care Process in Post-Liver Transplant Clinic
Issued Date
2024-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
00411345
eISSN
18732623
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85187252527
Pubmed ID
38350823
Journal Title
Transplantation Proceedings
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Transplantation Proceedings (2024)
Suggested Citation
Promraj R., Susomboon T., Tovikkai C., Kositamongkol P. Improving Patient Safety in Medication Management by Medication Reconciliation and Pharmaceutical Care Process in Post-Liver Transplant Clinic. Transplantation Proceedings (2024). doi:10.1016/j.transproceed.2024.01.022 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/97654
Title
Improving Patient Safety in Medication Management by Medication Reconciliation and Pharmaceutical Care Process in Post-Liver Transplant Clinic
Author(s)
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Introduction: Liver transplant recipients receive many medications for anti-rejection, infection prophylaxis, and treatment of comorbidities. Most of them also receive medications from multiple sources. Therefore, these patients are prone to drug-related problems (DRPs) and medication errors. This study aimed to study the effect of medication reconciliation (MR) and pharmaceutical care processes by transplant pharmacists in the post-liver transplant clinic. Methods: This study was a retrospective study in Siriraj Liver Transplant Center, Mahidol University, Thailand. Patients who received pharmaceutical care from transplant pharmacists were compared before and after the implementation of MR (October 2020-September 2021 vs October 2021-September 2022) to assess the prevalence of medication errors and identify DRPs between the 2 groups. Results: Before implementation of MR, in a total of 797 visits, 69 medication errors (8.7%) were found. The most errors were medication omissions (44.9%, n = 31). After the implementation of MR, in a total of 879 visits, 44 medication errors (5.0%) were found. Most were medication omission and incorrect strength (31.8%, n = 14). Medication errors significantly decreased by 36.2% (P < .001) after the implementation of MR. Regarding DRPs, transplant pharmacists could significantly detect more DRPs after implementation of MR, 66 DRPs before implementation of MR vs 111 DRPs after implementation of MR (P < .001). The most DRPs were non-adherence (34 vs 41). Conclusions: MR can reduce medication errors and assist transplant pharmacists in identifying DRPs that will lead to active intervention by attending physicians and/or patients to improve medication management and patient safety in post-liver transplant care.