Promoting Safer Use of High-Risk Pharmacotherapy: Impact of Pharmacist-Led Targeted Medication Reviews

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug reactions are a recognised cause of hospital admissions. A small group of medicines carry a higher risk of adverse outcomes and are more frequently involved in hospital admissions than other medicines. These ‘high-risk medicines’ have been identified in previous research. However, it is less clear how to reduce the risks associated with these known high-risk medicines, or which high-risk medicines should be prioritised when implementing risk reduction interventions. Previous research has questioned the efficacy of pharmacist-led medication reviews in reducing hospital admissions and drug-related morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we aimed to identify high-risk medicines through medication review to reduce iatrogenic disease; to determine a short list of high-risk medicines to target in medication reviews to achieve the greatest impact on reducing iatrogenic disease and patient harm; and to determine whether pharmacist-conducted medication reviews of high-risk medicines are safe and effective. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was undertaken in 16 general practices in one Scottish health board. All patients prescribed a high-risk medicine were identified and received a medication review from a pharmacist (3643 patients from a total population of 38,399). The pharmacist decided whether it was appropriate to continue the high-risk medicine, or if the medicine should be stopped or amended. The pharmacist made recommendations to the patient’s general practitioner (GP) for medicines to be stopped or amended, which the GP could choose to accept or not. Patient outcomes for all of the pharmacist’s recommendations were identified 1 year later to determine the effectiveness of the recommendations. RESULTS: High-risk medicines were prescribed to 3643 patients from a total population of 38,399 patients. The pharmacist made 440 recommendations for GPs to stop or amend high-risk medicines. GPs accepted 214 recommendations and rejected 226, giving an acceptance rate of 49 %. The 440 recommendations were then followed up 1 year later. The risk of having an adverse outcome was significantly reduced when the pharmacist’s recommendation to stop or amend a high-risk medicine was followed compared with rejecting the pharmacist’s recommendation and continuing the high-risk medicine unchanged (p < 0.001). A total of 22 adverse outcomes occurred when the pharmacist’s advice was rejected. Of these, 21 would have been prevented if the pharmacist’s recommendation had been followed and three resulted in hospital admission. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that medication reviews for high-risk medicines are safe and effective, with results achieved within 1 year of the initial review. It identified six high-risk medicines that could form the basis of targeted medication reviews in order to reduce iatrogenic disease. It also demonstrated that pharmacists are safe and effective at delivering medication reviews.