Cargando…

Pharmacist’s Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment: Introduction and Evaluation at Elderly Patient Admission

BACKGROUND: The role of the clinical pharmacist within the healthcare system remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe a pharmacist’s comprehensive geriatric assessment (pCGA) at admission of elderly patients and to assess its relevance in terms of medication compliance and pharmacis...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rhalimi, Faiza, Rhalimi, Mounir, Rauss, Alain
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5332309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27933555
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40801-016-0098-x
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The role of the clinical pharmacist within the healthcare system remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe a pharmacist’s comprehensive geriatric assessment (pCGA) at admission of elderly patients and to assess its relevance in terms of medication compliance and pharmacist interventions (PIs). METHODS: We conducted a prospective interventional study over 29 months in a 34-bed medical/rehabilitation geriatric ward in a French geriatric hospital. At admission, patients received pharmaceutical care through a consistent three-step process: (1) pharmacists met with the patient to undertake cognitive screening and assess their medication adherence (using the Girerd score) and medication history; (2) medication reconciliation was conducted at admission to detect intentional and unintentional discrepancies in treatment; and (3) clinical medication review was carried out throughout the patient’s stay. The pharmacist conveyed proposed interventions to optimise treatment to the physician through the electronic health record. The number and type of PIs and their rate of implementation were recorded. RESULTS: In total, 539 patients aged >65 years were included; their mean age was 84 years. Cognitive screening showed that 45% of patients were confused at admission. Medication adherence assessment indicated that 50.2% had adherence problems. Medication reconciliation at admission detected discrepancies in 48%, with a mean of 1.09 unintended discrepancies per patient. Patients were taking an average of 7 ± 3 drugs. In total, 828 PIs were reported to physicians; 520 were accepted and implemented (62.8% acceptance rate). CONCLUSION: This approach helps to avoid medication errors and enables the suggestion of relevant PIs, which were implemented by physicians in two-thirds of cases.