Provisions in the laws of Pakistan to combat serious drug-related offences

British drug control laws were in force in Pakistan until February 1979 when the President of Pakistan promulgated the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979. Under this Order more severe penalties are prescribed for those who violate the regulations of import, export, manufacture or processing of any intoxicants, the term which refers mainly to products of cannabis, opiates and coca derivatives. The Prohibition Order, 1979 and the Dangerous Drugs Act 1930 were amended in December 1983 to provide for further increases in punitive sanctions for offenders violating drug control laws and even more severe sanctions for offenders who are recidivists.     

A systems approach to the management of drug-related problems

A comprehensive assessment of an individual's drug problem needs to include consideration of the type, frequency and amount of drug use, degree of dependence, concomitant medical problems and general health, previous treatment history, family and social relationships, employment and financial situation, psychological functioning, criminal activity and legal situation. The aim of a community based drug advisory service in Sydney is to provide an assessment-referral-treatment service which aims to match an individual's drug-related problems to the most appropriate range of therapeutic interventions. The components of the system include: intake, assessment, case conference, intervention and research. The system also accommodates the NSW Drug and Alcohol Court Assessment Program which interfaces Criminal Justice and Health Systems. Clinical programs of the service are described including a methadone maintenance program.     

An ABC of drug-related problems.

The problems relating to the use of medicines are manifold. They may differ in pharmacological, pathological, epidemiological and legal respects, and may have different consequences, for example, as regards scientific study, regulation or rational use. Pharmacovigilance is concerned with all such problems: adverse effects and interactions as well as problems relating to ineffectiveness, inappropriate use, counterfeiting, dependence or poisoning. Practically all medicine-related problems can be classified in one basic system, taking into account their characteristics and distinctions. This system distinguishes between appropriate and inappropriate drug use; dose-related and dose-unrelated problems [corrected]; and types A ('drug actions'), B ('patient reactions') and C ('statistical') adverse effects. This classification may serve as an educational tool and may be useful in when choosing a study method and for the design of effective strategies in pharmacovigilance.     

In-hospital medication reviews reduce unidentified drug-related problems

Purpose

To examine the impact of a new model of care, in which a clinical pharmacist conducts structured medication reviews and a multi-professional team collates systematic medication care plans, on the number of unidentified DRPs in a hospital setting.

Methods

In a prospective two-period study, patients admitted to an internal medicine ward at the University Hospital of Lund, Sweden, were included if they were ≥ 65 years old, used ≥ 3 medications on a regular basis and had stayed on the ward for ≥ 5 weekdays. Intervention patients were given the new model of care and control patients received conventional care. DRPs were then retrospectively identified after study completion from blinded patient records for both intervention and control patients. Two pairs of evaluators independently evaluated and classified these DRPs as having been identified/unidentified during the hospital stay and according to type and clinical significance. The primary endpoint was the number of unidentified DRPs, and the secondary endpoints were the numbers of unidentified DRPs within each type and clinical significance category.

Results

The study included a total of 141 (70 intervention and 71 control) patients. The intervention group benefited from a reduction in the total number of unidentified DRPs per patient during the hospital stay: intervention group median 1 (1st–3rd quartile 0–2), control group 9 (6–13.5) (p < 0.001), and also in the number of medications associated with unidentified DRPs per patient: intervention group 1 (0–2), control group 8 (5–10) (p < 0.001). All sub-categories of DRPs that were frequent in the control group were significantly reduced in the intervention group. Similarly, the DRPs were less clinically significant in the intervention group.

Conclusions

A multi-professional team, including a clinical pharmacist, conducting structured medication reviews and collating systematic medication care plans proved very effective in reducing the number of unidentified DRPs for elderly in-patients.     

Characterization of drug-related problems in elderly patients on admission to a medical ward

The incidence, types, avoidability and risk factors associated with drug-related problems (DRPs) in geriatric patients on admission to a medical ward of the Toronto Hospital were assessed. The admission note and laboratory data of 150 consecutive admissions were reviewed for the presence of an adverse drug reaction, inappropriate dose, non-compliance, drug interaction, or lack of required medication. The avoidability (avoidable, possibly avoidable, or unavoidable) and contribution to hospitalization (major reason, contributing or non contributing) of each DRP was characterized. On admission, 41% of patients had a DRP identified, of which most were potentially avoidable (96.8%) and involved commonly prescribed drugs. The DRP was the major or contributing reason for admission in 31% of cases. Polypharmacy was a statistically significant risk factor for a DRP, particularly for male patients (p = 0.0010). In this elderly population, DRPs were not statistically correlated to age greater than 65 years, gender, renal function, native language, or duration of hospital stay. The incidence of DRPs and hospitalizations in the elderly can potentially be reduced by improving medication use. Enhanced communication, particularly between hospital and community pharmacists and their patients, may be a key mechanism.     

Identification of drug-related problems by a clinical pharmacist in addition to computerized alerts

Background Both clinical pharmacists and computerized physician order entry systems with clinical decision support (CPOE/CDSS) can reduce drug-related problems (DRPs). However, the contribution of a clinical pharmacist in addition to CPOE/CDSS has not been established in a prospective study. Objective To determine which DRPs can be identified by a clinical pharmacist in a setting with routine use of CPOE/CDSS. Setting Two surgical and two neurological wards in St. Elisabeth hospital, a 600-bed teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Methods In this observational prospective follow-up study a clinical pharmacist reviewed the pharmacotherapy of patients admitted to surgical and neurological wards to identify DRPs (i.e. medication errors and adverse drug events) and discussed the relevance of identified problems and interventions to resolve these with the responsible physician. Acceptance of the proposed interventions and the presence of alerts in CPOE/CDSS were assessed. Primary outcome was the proportion of DRPs identified by the clinical pharmacist that also triggered a CPOE/CDSS alert. Differences between the DRPs that generated an alert and those that did not were expressed as relative risks or analyzed with Chi square statistics or Mann–Whitney U tests. Main outcome measure The proportion of drug-related problems identified by the clinical pharmacist that also generated an alert in the CPOE/CDSS. Results During 1206 medication reviews, 442 potential DRPs were identified; 286 (65 %) DRPs were considered relevant and 247 (56 %) of the proposed interventions were accepted. A CPOE/CDSS alert was generated for 35 (8 %) of the DRPs the clinical pharmacist identified. The only difference between problems that triggered an alert and those that did not was the class of the DRP (indication 23 vs. 36 %, effectiveness 23 vs. 13 %, safety 23 vs. 10 % and pharmaceutical care issues 31 vs. 42 %, p = 0.02). CPOE/CDSS triggered 623 additional alerts that were handled during routine pharmacy service. Conclusions As most DRPs identified by a clinical pharmacist were not detected in daily clinical practice by CPOE/CDSS, a clinical pharmacist contributes to reducing DRPs. The sensitivity of CPOE/CDSS to detect certain classes of problems should be optimized.     

Handling drug-related problems in rehabilitation patients: a randomized study

Background Drug-related problems (DRPs) have been found to be associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and health costs. Objective To investigate whether the inclusion of pharmacists in a rehabilitation team influences the handling of DRPs in the ward and whether an intervention in hospital affects drug use after discharge. Setting The rehabilitation ward of a general hospital in Oslo, Norway. Methods Patients were randomized into an intervention group (IG) or a usual care group (CG). The IG patients were followed prospectively by a pharmacist, who reviewed the patients?? drug therapies using information from their medical records and patient interviews. The pharmacist identified DRPs and suggested solutions during multidisciplinary team meetings. The IG patients received targeted drug counselling from the pharmacist before discharge. The drug therapy in the CG, for the period from study randomization to discharge, was assessed retrospectively by the pharmacist, who identified DRPs and recorded how they were acted upon. Three months after discharge, pharmacists who were blinded to the patient randomization, visited the patients at home and interviewed them about their medication. Main outcome measures: Types and frequencies of DRPs in the IG and CG were compared at hospital admission, at discharge, and 3?months after discharge. Results Of the 77 patients included, 40 belonged to the IG and 37 to the CG. Patient characteristics (IG vs CG) were as follows: age 73.5 versus 76.8?years; female 58 versus 68%; mean number of drugs at admission 8.3 versus 7.8; and mean number of drugs at discharge 8.5 versus 7.7. At admission, 4.4 DRPs per patient were recorded in the IG and 4.2 in the CG. Significantly more DRPs were acted upon and resolved in the IG; at discharge, the IG had 1.2 DRPs per patient and the CG had 4.0 (P?<?0.01). At the home visit, a significant difference between the groups was found: 1.63 versus 2.62 DRPs (P?=?0.02) for the IG and the CG, respectively. Conclusion Involvement of a pharmacist in drug-therapy management, including participation in multidisciplinary team discussions, markedly improved the identification and resolution of DRPs during a hospital stay. The benefit persisted after discharge.     

A dual intervention in geriatric patients to prevent drug-related problems and improve discharge management

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy - Background Drug-related problems (DRPs) endanger geriatric patients’ safety. Especially a follow-up treatment with increased number of care...     

The scope of drug-related problems in the home care setting

Introduction While drug-related problems (DRPs) in the inpatient setting are well known, the scope of these problems in home care has not been critically evaluated. Aim of the Review Our primary objective was to evaluate the incidence and demographics of DRPs in home care. Our specific aims were to characterize the rate of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), medication errors (MEs) and adverse drug events (ADEs) and to identify risk factors which contribute to DRPs in the home care setting. Methods Pubmed, Embase and CiNAHL databases were systematically searched from January 2000 to December 2016 for all publications which quantitatively characterized DRPs in the home care setting. Results The most commonly reported DRPs characterized in studies were PIMs (n = 16), MEs (n = 4) and the ME-subcategory medication-related discrepancies (n = 7). The frequency of PIMs ranged from 19.8 to 48.4%; up to 26% PIMs were considered severe. Polypharmacy (≥ 9 drugs) and increasing age were the most common risk factors for DRPs. Insufficient interdisciplinary teamwork and inconsistent performance of medication reviews were also risks factors for DRPs. Patients and/or caregivers were responsible for 42.3% of DRPs. Discussion Compared with acute inpatient care, DRPs are more frequently reported in home care. The rate of DRPs varies depending upon the reference used to define the problem. Conclusion Transfer of complete medical records and the use of an interdisciplinary team have the potential to reduce DRPs, including MEs, specifically when integrating a pharmacist providing regular medication review. Importantly, patients and informal caregivers must be significant partners with this interdisciplinary team.     

Identify and categorize drug-related problems in hospitalized surgical patients in China

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy - Background Data is lacking on types and severities of drug-related problems (DRPs) in hospitalized surgical patients in China. Objective To identify and...     

Electronic screening of medical records to detect inpatients at risk of drug-related problems

Objective The objective of the study is to develop and validate a screening tool for clinical pharmacists (CPs), comprising electronic queries (EQs) structured to identify inpatients at risk of drug-related problems (DRPs) [1]. Setting Internal Medicine and Geriatric Units of the (multi-site) H?pital du Valais. Method EQs, identifying patients with potential DRPs and/or those requiring a medication review were compared with a CP-conducted manual check of all electronic medical records (EMRs), during their standard activities. The queries were aimed at identifying patients receiving drugs such as cytochrome P450 inducers, inhibitors or high-risk medications, those with renal impairment, those on digoxin with low serum potassium, those with intravenous (i.v.) anti-infectives or i.v. acetaminophen for more than 3 days, and elderly patients with polymedication (≥80 years and >10 drugs). Main outcome measure Sensitivity and specificity of the screening tool. Results Five hundred and one patients seen by 4 CPs during 36 ward rounds were screened. The EQs identified 64.7% of the visited inpatients. The CPs detected at least one DRP in 64.9% of all patients. A sensitivity of 85.1% and a specificity of 60.4% were achieved. Conclusion This tool allows for efficient and rapid screening of patients at risk of DRPs in preparation for the ward round. It helps CPs to prioritize their medication reviews and to optimize their workload.