Interprofessional survey on medication reconciliation activities in the US Department of Veterans' Affairs: development and validation of an Implementation Readiness Questionnaire.
Healthcare quality improvement
Implementation science
Medication reconciliation
Medication safety
Surveys
Journal
BMJ open quality
ISSN: 2399-6641
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open Qual
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101710381
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2022
10 2022
Historique:
received:
22
03
2022
accepted:
20
09
2022
entrez:
13
10
2022
pubmed:
14
10
2022
medline:
18
10
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Medication reconciliation (MR) can detect medication history discrepancies at interfaces-in-care and help avoid downstream adverse drug events. However, organisations have struggled to implement high-quality MR programmes. The literature has identified systems barriers, including technology capabilities and data interoperability. However, organisational culture as a root cause has been underexplored. Our objectives were to develop an implementation readiness questionnaire and measure staff attitudes towards MR across a healthcare enterprise. We developed and distributed a questionnaire to 170 Veterans' Health Affairs (VHA) sites using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) software. The questionnaire contained 21 Likert-scale items that measured three constructs, such as: (1) the extent that clinicians valued MR; (2) perceptions of workflow compatibility and (3) perceptions concerning organisational climate of implementation. 8704 clinicians and staff responded to our questionnaire (142 of 170 VHA facilities). Most staff believed reconciling medications can improve medication safety (approximately 90% agreed it was 'important'). However, most (approximately 90%) also expressed concerns about changes to their workflow. One-third of respondents prioritised other duties over MR and reported barriers associated with implementation climate. Only 47% of respondents agreed they had enough resources to address discrepancies when identified. Our findings indicate that an MR readiness assessment can forecast challenges and inform development of a context-sensitive implementation bundle. Clinicians surveyed struggled with resources, technology challenges and implementation climate. A strong campaign should include clear leadership messaging, credible champions and resources to overcome technical challenges. This manuscript provides a method to conduct a readiness assessment and highlights the importance of organisational culture in an MR campaign. The data can help assess site or network readiness for an MR change management programme.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Medication reconciliation (MR) can detect medication history discrepancies at interfaces-in-care and help avoid downstream adverse drug events. However, organisations have struggled to implement high-quality MR programmes. The literature has identified systems barriers, including technology capabilities and data interoperability. However, organisational culture as a root cause has been underexplored.
OBJECTIVES
Our objectives were to develop an implementation readiness questionnaire and measure staff attitudes towards MR across a healthcare enterprise.
METHODS
We developed and distributed a questionnaire to 170 Veterans' Health Affairs (VHA) sites using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) software. The questionnaire contained 21 Likert-scale items that measured three constructs, such as: (1) the extent that clinicians valued MR; (2) perceptions of workflow compatibility and (3) perceptions concerning organisational climate of implementation.
RESULTS
8704 clinicians and staff responded to our questionnaire (142 of 170 VHA facilities). Most staff believed reconciling medications can improve medication safety (approximately 90% agreed it was 'important'). However, most (approximately 90%) also expressed concerns about changes to their workflow. One-third of respondents prioritised other duties over MR and reported barriers associated with implementation climate. Only 47% of respondents agreed they had enough resources to address discrepancies when identified.
INTERPRETATION
Our findings indicate that an MR readiness assessment can forecast challenges and inform development of a context-sensitive implementation bundle. Clinicians surveyed struggled with resources, technology challenges and implementation climate. A strong campaign should include clear leadership messaging, credible champions and resources to overcome technical challenges.
CONCLUSIONS
This manuscript provides a method to conduct a readiness assessment and highlights the importance of organisational culture in an MR campaign. The data can help assess site or network readiness for an MR change management programme.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36229073
pii: bmjoq-2021-001750
doi: 10.1136/bmjoq-2021-001750
pmc: PMC9562315
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Arch Intern Med. 2009 Apr 27;169(8):771-80
pubmed: 19398689
HERD. 2013 Spring;6(3):30-48
pubmed: 23817905
Mayo Clin Proc. 2014 Aug;89(8):1116-25
pubmed: 24981217
J Hosp Med. 2008 Nov-Dec;3(6):465-72
pubmed: 19084896
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Sep-Oct;19(5):728-34
pubmed: 22556186
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006 Nov-Dec;13(6):581-92
pubmed: 17114640
Am J Med Qual. 2006 Sep-Oct;21(5):293-5
pubmed: 16973942
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2013 Jul-Aug;9(4):419-30
pubmed: 23089295
Appl Clin Inform. 2018 Apr;9(2):285-301
pubmed: 29719884
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2015;218:61-67
pubmed: 26262528
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009 May-Jun;16(3):300-4
pubmed: 19261949
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;234:201-205
pubmed: 28186041
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2018 Apr 16;2017:1802-1811
pubmed: 29854251
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Nov 01;24(6):1095-1101
pubmed: 28505367
J Hosp Med. 2010 Oct;5(8):477-85
pubmed: 20945473
J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Sep;23(9):1414-22
pubmed: 18563493
J Hosp Med. 2015 Mar;10(3):184-6
pubmed: 25408285
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2007 Aug;3(4):695-703
pubmed: 18472993
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015 May;22(3):718-29
pubmed: 25773129
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015 Mar;22(2):340-9
pubmed: 25665706
Medsurg Nurs. 2008 Oct;17(5):332-6
pubmed: 19051982
J Hosp Med. 2011 Jul-Aug;6(6):329-37
pubmed: 21834114
Ann Intern Med. 2013 Mar 5;158(5 Pt 2):397-403
pubmed: 23460096
J Biomed Inform. 2019 Jul;95:103208
pubmed: 31078660
J Biomed Inform. 2018 Jun;82:178-186
pubmed: 29751104
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;194:166-72
pubmed: 23941950
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013 Mar 1;70(5):453-6
pubmed: 23413171
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2007;129(Pt 2):1022-6
pubmed: 17911870
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2009 May;35(5):264-70
pubmed: 19480380
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Jun 25;13:230
pubmed: 23800355
Ann Pharmacother. 2009 Oct;43(10):1667-75
pubmed: 19737997
Pharmacotherapy. 2002 Feb;22(2):134-47
pubmed: 11837551
Inform Prim Care. 2011;19(2):105-18
pubmed: 22417821
Can J Hosp Pharm. 2015 May-Jun;68(3):202-9
pubmed: 26157181
J Biomed Inform. 2010 Feb;43(1):159-72
pubmed: 19615467
J Hosp Med. 2019 Aug 16;14(10):614-617
pubmed: 31433768
J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Aug;27(8):924-32
pubmed: 22350761
N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 13;370(11):1063-4
pubmed: 24620871
Saudi Pharm J. 2017 Jan;25(1):52-58
pubmed: 28223862
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Jan;24(1):227-240
pubmed: 27301747
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2011 Jun;144(6):831-7
pubmed: 21493322