“…Approximately 40% of patients who have been discharged from hospital may subsequently experience medicines-related problems, including medicines-related errors. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] Findings indicate that patients often lack knowledge about their medications following hospital discharge [14][15][16][17][18] and that many patients report not receiving important medicines-related information. [19][20][21] World Health Organisation policy states that offering information on medicines via Medicines Information Centres, and providing public education about medicines, are two of 12 essential interventions to promote the rational use of medicines.…”
Objectives Hospital-based patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) and medicines information services for the general public (MISGP) are available in many countries to support people with their medicines. Our aim was to examine the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of PMHS and MISGP. Methods Searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science, on 11 August 2018. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted, grey literature was searched, and study quality/risk of bias was assessed. Findings were synthesised in a narrative synthesis. Where appropriate, weighted means were calculated. Key findings Thirty-two studies were identified for inclusion (17 published articles, 15 conference abstracts). Eighteen studies were conducted within the United Kingdom. Mean quality assessment was moderate (51%), and risk of bias was high (63%). PMHS and MISGP are both typically perceived as positive (e.g. 94% and 91% of participants were satisfied with using a PMHS and MISGP, respectively). For PMHS, the advice received is reported to be usually followed (94%, and 66% for MISGP). For both services, users report several positive outcomes (e.g. problems resolved/avoided, feeling reassured and improved health). PMHS may also be effective for correcting medicines-related errors (up to 39% of calls may concern such errors) and for potentially avoiding medicines-related harm (48% of enquiries concerned situations that were judged to have the potential to harm patients). Conclusions Findings suggest that both PMHS and MISGP may be beneficial sources of medicines-related support. However, the moderate quality and high risk of bias of studies highlight that more high-quality research is needed.
“…Approximately 40% of patients who have been discharged from hospital may subsequently experience medicines-related problems, including medicines-related errors. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] Findings indicate that patients often lack knowledge about their medications following hospital discharge [14][15][16][17][18] and that many patients report not receiving important medicines-related information. [19][20][21] World Health Organisation policy states that offering information on medicines via Medicines Information Centres, and providing public education about medicines, are two of 12 essential interventions to promote the rational use of medicines.…”
Objectives Hospital-based patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) and medicines information services for the general public (MISGP) are available in many countries to support people with their medicines. Our aim was to examine the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of PMHS and MISGP. Methods Searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science, on 11 August 2018. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted, grey literature was searched, and study quality/risk of bias was assessed. Findings were synthesised in a narrative synthesis. Where appropriate, weighted means were calculated. Key findings Thirty-two studies were identified for inclusion (17 published articles, 15 conference abstracts). Eighteen studies were conducted within the United Kingdom. Mean quality assessment was moderate (51%), and risk of bias was high (63%). PMHS and MISGP are both typically perceived as positive (e.g. 94% and 91% of participants were satisfied with using a PMHS and MISGP, respectively). For PMHS, the advice received is reported to be usually followed (94%, and 66% for MISGP). For both services, users report several positive outcomes (e.g. problems resolved/avoided, feeling reassured and improved health). PMHS may also be effective for correcting medicines-related errors (up to 39% of calls may concern such errors) and for potentially avoiding medicines-related harm (48% of enquiries concerned situations that were judged to have the potential to harm patients). Conclusions Findings suggest that both PMHS and MISGP may be beneficial sources of medicines-related support. However, the moderate quality and high risk of bias of studies highlight that more high-quality research is needed.
“…There is some emerging evidence regarding the impact of medication issues post intensive care discharge. 27 More work is required in this area to ensure potentially life-threatening errors are reduced and appropriate interventions put in place.…”
ObjectiveTo examine the impact of critical care on future alcohol-related behaviour. Further, it aimed to explore patterns of recovery for patients with and without alcohol use disorders beyond the hospital environment.DesignIn-depth, semistructured interviews with participants (patients) 3â7â months post intensive care discharge.SettingThe setting for this study was a 20-bedded mixed intensive care unit (ICU), in a large teaching hospital in Scotland. On admission, patients were allocated to one of the three alcohol groups: low risk, harmful/hazardous and alcohol dependency.Participants21 participants who received mechanical ventilation for greater than 3â days were interviewed between March 2013 and June 2014.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsFour themes which impacted on recovery from ICU were identified in this patient group: psychological resilience, support for activities of daily living, social support and cohesion and the impact of alcohol use disorders on recovery. Participants also discussed the importance of personalised goal setting and appropriate and timely rehabilitation for alcohol-related behaviours during the critical care recovery period.ConclusionsThere is a significant interplay between alcohol misuse and recovery from critical illness. This study has demonstrated that at present, there is a haphazard approach to rehabilitation for patients after ICU. A more targeted rehabilitation pathway for patients leaving critical care, with specific emphasis on alcohol misuse if appropriate, requires to be generated.
“…There was neither any plan made for them to be restarted nor communication as to why they should be permanently discontinued. Previous data suggest that this is not uncommon 7. During the pharmacy intervention medicines were reconciled, comparing pre-ICU admission medications, what he received during his ICU stay, and what he was on at the InS:PIRE visit.…”
Section: Interventions Delivered During the Ins:pire Programmementioning
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citationsâcitations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.