risk-informed interventions in community pharmacy: implementation and evaluation michael r. cohen...
TRANSCRIPT
Risk-Informed Interventions in Community Pharmacy: Risk-Informed Interventions in Community Pharmacy: Implementation and Evaluation Implementation and Evaluation
Michael R. Cohen (Principal Investigator)
Judy L. Smetzer (Project Manager)
Institute for Safe Medication Practices
September 14, 2009
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 2
Current Research Project
Risk-informed Interventions in Community Pharmacy: Implementation and Evaluation
Three interventions
1) Scripted mandatory patient counseling for targeted high-alert medications
2) Readiness assessment for bar-coding technology
3) Risk assessment/intervention scorecard
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 3
Prior Study Aims
Using Risk Models to Identify and Prioritize Outpatient
High-Alert Medications
• Identify a list of high-alert medications dispensed from community pharmacies– Available error data, ISMP surveys, review of literature, litigation
data,
• Develop comprehensive risk models for four high-alert medications (ST-PRA) using model building teams with facilitators– Warfarin, fentanyl transdermal, insulin analogs, methotrexate oral
• Identify error pathways that have the highest probability of causing harm (fault trees)
• Identify and determine the impact of approaches for eliminating or reducing the risk of harm
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 4
High-Alert Medications
Drug Class/CategoryDrug Class/Category
• Antiretroviral agents
• Chemotherapy, oral
• Hypoglycemic agents, oral
• Immunosuppressant agents
• Insulin
• Opioids, all formulations
• Pregnancy category X drugs
• Pediatric liquid medications that require measurement
Individual DrugsIndividual Drugs
• carbamazepine
• chloral hydrate liquid – sedation of children
• heparin– unfractionated/low-molecular weight
• methotrexate– non-oncologic use
• midazolam liquid– sedation of children
• propylthiouracil
• warfarin
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 5
Socio-Technical Probabilistic Risk Assessment (ST-PRA)
• Models combinations of failures that lead to undesirable consequence (Relex software)
• Used in other industries
• Differs from FMEA, which analyzes each failure separately, never in combination (pharmacy dispensing process)
• Begins by defining the “top-level event” (PADE)
– Medication dispensed to wrong patient at point of sale
– Patient given wrong dose of warfarin
• Uses experienced modeling team to yield probability estimates of “basic events”
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 6
Socio-Technical Probabilistic Risk Assessment (ST-PRA)
• Risk model includes effects of:
– Human error
– Socio-technical aspects • At-risk behaviors and procedural deviations
• Mechanical/technology failures
• Some data readily available in community pharmacies
– Rx volume, exposure rates, technologies and percent of use, computer alerts followed, presence of certain steps or processes like use of drive through window, availability of 24 hr pharmacy, opening bag at P.O.S.
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 7
Example of ST-PRA Fault Tree Risk Model
Top Level Event Gate1
Medication dispensed to wrong
customer at the point-of-sale
Q:0.0014 And Gate
Gate2
Medication given to wrong
customer
Q:0.0034 OR Gate
Gate3
Wrong customer not detected
at the point-of-sale
Q:0.41And Gate
Event3
Customer does not catch
identification error at point-of-sale
Q:0.9Basic Event
Gate6
Pharmacy staff do not detect
identification error at point-of-sale
Q:0.45 OR Gate
Event2
Medication was placed in
wrong customer's bag
Q:0.0004Initiating Errors
Event1
Wrong customer's medications selected by pharmacy
at point-of-sale when dispensing medication
Q:0.003
Gate4
Identification error not caught when
following customer identification process
Q:0.0005And Gate And Gate
Gate5
Identification error not caught when customer
identification process not followed
Q:0.45
Event7
Pharmacy staff fail to detect the error when
customer identification process does not occur
Q:0.9
Event6
Exposure rate for not following
customer identification process
Q:0.5
Event5
Pharmacy staff fail to detect the error when
following customer identification process
Q:0.001
Event4
Exposure rate of following
customer identification process
Q:0.5
Exposure Rate Basic Event Exposure Rate Basic Event
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 8
Human Error Probabilities
Unfamiliar task performed at speed/no idea of consequences 5:10
Task involving high stress levels 3:10
Complex task requiring high comprehension and skill 15:100
Select ambiguously labeled control/package 5:100
Failure to perform a check correctly 5:100
Error in routine operation when care required 1:100
Well designed, familiar task under ideal conditions 4:10,000
Human performance limit 1:10,000
ST-PRA uses probability estimates to quantify risk
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 9
Performance shaping factors that impact on probability of error in community pharmacy
– Task complexity
– Information complexity
– Work environment
– Stress
– Time urgency
– Training/experience
– Familiarity with task
– Design of labels
– Clarity of handwritten prescriptions
– Look-alike drug names or packages
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 10
Insulin Analog Data Entry Error (wrong drug)
• Start– 1 data entry error per 100 prescriptions
• Capture– 96% errors captured
• Risk (PADEs that reach patients)– 3 wrong drug errors per 10,000 prescriptions
• 2,200 errors annually (chains in study)
• 6,400 errors annually (national)
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 11
Insulin Analog Data Entry Error (wrong drug)
• Interventions – Use of tall man letters to distinguish products
• 50% improvement
– Increase patient counseling from 30% to 80%• 67% improvement
– Conduct a second redundant data entry verification during product verification• 50% improvement
– All three interventions• 95% improvement
• 3/10,000 to 1/1 million errors that reach patients
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 12
Fentanyl Patches Prescribing Errors (wrong dose)
• Start– 1 dose error per 1,000 prescriptions
• Capture– 27% errors
– Lack of information about opioid tolerance, indication
• Risk (PADEs that reach patients)– 7 dose errors per 10,000 prescriptions
• 1,000 errors annually (chains in study)
• 3,400 errors annually (national)
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 13
Fentanyl Patches Prescribing Errors (wrong dose)
• Interventions– Increase in patient counseling from 10% to 80%
and increase ability to detect inappropriate doses during counseling session• 64% improvement
– Conduct an intake history of opioid use at drop-off• 40% improvement (tested with 20% implementation)
– Both interventions• 78% improvement
– 7/10,000 to 1/10,000 errors that reach patients
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 14
Warfarin Filling Errors (drug/dose)
• Start– 1 drug selection error per 1,000 prescriptions – 1 dose selection error per 10 prescriptions
• Capture– 99.9% errors – Consistent use of bar-coding technology
• Risk (PADEs that reach patients)– 9 wrong drug errors/1 billion prescriptions
• 1 error every 14 years (chains in study only)– 9 wrong dose errors/10 million prescriptions
• 7 errors annually (chains in study only)
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 15
Warfarin Filling Errors (drug/dose)
• Interventions– Increase patient counseling from 30% to 80%
• 67% improvement– 9/1 billion to 3/1 billion errors reach pt (drug)– 9/10 million to 3/10 million errors reach pt (dose)
– Eliminate bar-coding technology • (95,340%) reduction in safety
– Eliminate pill image on the product verification screen• (334%) reduction in safety
– Eliminate bar-coding and pill image• (445,000%) reduction in safety
– 9/1 billion to 4/100,000 errors that reach pt (drug)– 9/10 million to 4/1,000 errors that reach pt (dose)
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 16
All Medications Point of Sale Error (wrong patient)
• Start– Due to bagging error (4 per 10,000 prescriptions)– Due to misidentification of bag or patient (3 per 1,000
prescriptions)
• Captured– 64% errors captured
• Risk (PADEs that reach patients)– 1 error per 1,000 prescriptions
• 1.3 million errors annually (chains in study)• 4 million errors annually (national)
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 17
All Medications Point of Sale Error (wrong patient)
• Interventions– Increase patient counseling from 30% to 50%
• 27% improvement
– Open the bag at the POS• 56% improvement
– Increase compliance with ID process from 50% to 80%• 34% improvement
– All three interventions together• 86% improvement
• 1/1,000 to 2/10,000 errors that reach patients
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 18
Current Research Project
Risk-informed Interventions in Community Pharmacy: Implementation and Evaluation
• Scripted mandatory patient counseling • Warfarin
• Fentanyl patches
• Methotrexate
• Insulin analogs
• Low-molecular weight heparin*
• Hydrocodone and oxycodone (with acetaminophen) – top 200*
• Readiness assessment for bar-coding technology
• Risk assessment/intervention scorecard using risk models from first study: HAMERS tool
* Added to increase frequency of observation of counseling sessions
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 19
Intervention 3: HAMERS(High-Alert Medication Error Risk Scorecard)
• ST-PRA models translated into practical assessment tool and scorecard
• Tool Kit will include:– Introduction – Key learning from risk models (prior study)– User instructions– HAMERS tool
• Scorecard with qualitative (distribution of risk) and quantitative (PADE rates) information
• Tool calculations driven by reports from original risk models
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 20
Intervention 3: HAMERS
Inputs
• Set-up questions– Relevance: Would the step provide capture opportunity?– System attributes: Require data entry verification for pharmacists?– Availability: Use bar-coding technology? Specific computer alerts?– Prescription volumes?
• Exposure rates– Frequency of pharmacists/technicians entering prescriptions?
• Capture opportunities– What percent of errors will be caught during this step?
• At-risk behaviors– Frequency of choosing not to ask patient for second identifier?
• Human errors– Frequency of forgetting to read back an oral prescription?
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 21
Intervention 3: HAMERS
Outputs
• Scorecard that quantifies the risk of specific PADEs
• Bar-graph that shows distribution of risk– Which elements contribute most to the PADE?
• Menu of interventions to reduce risk – Pharmacy chooses from the menu of interventions
– Pharmacy makes changes to inputs based on the planned interventions
– Pharmacy receives a revised scorecard that quantifies improvements based on planned interventions
– “If (intervention) is implemented, then risk that the PADE will reach the patient is ___%.”
– If risk factor is (increased/decreased) by __%, risk that the PADE will reach the customer is reduced to __%.”
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 22
Intervention 3: HAMERS
• Tool can be used to measure risk within dispensing system for any medication or most types of errors/ PADEs– Focus on high-alert medications– Can measure risk of not capturing prescribing errors– Cannot measure risk of patient self-administration
• Limited menu of interventions– General in nature– Specific to high-alert medications– Include all tested interventions from prior study and
others
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 23
Intervention 1: Patient Counseling
• Pre-intervention observation in pharmacies– 50 observations completed
– 4 states• 2 states with mandatory counseling
• 2 states with mandatory offer to counsel
– Preliminary findings• No counseling in states with “offer” to counsel
– Counseling for OTCs more common than for prescription drugs
• More frequent counseling in states with mandatory counseling
– Differences between state enforcement of counseling
– Not covering information linked to PADEs
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 24
Intervention 1: Patient Counseling
• Implementation Tool Kit– Scripted counseling materials, checklists, health questions
– Consumer handouts about targeted drugs
• Specifically targets known causes of PADEs
– Consumer outreach materials to promote counseling
• Availability on http://www.consumermedsafety.org
– Model state regulations for requiring/limiting mandatory counseling for high-alert drugs
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 25
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 27
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 28
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 29
Intervention 1: Patient Counseling
Measures
• Self-administered surveys to patients – Perception of counseling encounter/value of handouts
– Increase understanding?
– Result in new information?
– Result in changed behavior?
– Reduce risk of self-administration error?
– Treatment for PADE?
– Toll-free number to call research team• Incentives to send back survey
• Self-administered surveys to pharmacists– Perceived value and impact of counseling
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 30
Intervention 1: Patient Counseling
Measures (cont’d)
• Post-implementation observation– Detection of prescribing or dispensing errors
– Detection of potential self-administration errors
– Barriers to counseling
– Factors that facilitate counseling
– Quality of counseling sessions
ISMP 2009 Institute for Safe Medication Practices 31
Intervention 2: Bar-coding Readiness Assessment
• 46-50% of community pharmacies in the US do not use barcode technology for product verification
• 100 pharmacies participating in the study
• Survey to determine why non-users are still non-users
• Phase 1
– 100 pharmacies will complete the assessment and submit findings
– Pharmacies will complete survey to measure perceived value
• Phase 2
– Pharmacies from Phase 1 that have since implemented bar-coding will complete survey to measure actual value