Background Clinically important medication errors are common after hospital discharge. They include preventable or ameliorable adverse drug events as well as medication discrepancies or non-adherence with high potential for future harm (potential adverse drug events). Objective The Pharmacist Intervention for Low Literacy in Cardiovascular Disease (PILL-CVD) study sought to determine the effect of a tailored intervention on the occurrence of clinically important medication errors after hospital discharge. Design Randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation and blinded outcome assessors. Setting Two tertiary care academic hospitals. Patients Adults hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes or acute decompensated heart failure. Intervention Pharmacist-assisted medication reconciliation, inpatient pharmacist counseling, low-literacy adherence aids, and individualized telephone follow-up after discharge. Measurements The primary outcome was the number of clinically important medication errors per patient during the first 30 days after hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included preventable or ameliorable adverse drug events, as well as potential adverse drug events. Results Among 851 participants, 432 (50.8%) experienced 1 or more clinically important medication errors; 23% of such errors were judged to be serious, and 2% life-threatening. Adverse drug events occurred in 258 patients (30.3%) and potential adverse drug events in 253 (29.7%). The intervention did not significantly alter the per-patient number of clinically important medication errors (IRR=0.92; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.10) or adverse drug events (IRR=1.09; CI, 0.86 to 1.39). Intervention patients tended to have fewer potential adverse drug events (IRR=0.80; CI, 0.61 to 1.04). Limitations The characteristics of the study hospitals and participants may limit generalizability. Conclusions Clinically important medication errors were present among half of patients after hospital discharge and were not significantly reduced by a health-literacy sensitive, pharmacist-delivered intervention.
The BHLS, administered by nurses during routine clinical care, demonstrates adequate reliability and validity to be used as a health literacy measure.
Background Patients with inadequate health literacy often have poorer health outcomes and increased utilization and costs, compared to those with adequate health literacy skills. The Institute of Medicine has recommended that health literacy assessment be incorporated into health care information systems, which would facilitate large-scale studies of the effects of health literacy, as well as evaluation of system interventions to improve care by addressing health literacy. As part of the Health Literacy Screening (HEALS) study, a brief health literacy screen (BHLS) was incorporated into the electronic health record (EHR) at a large academic medical center. Methods Changes were implemented to the nursing intake documentation across all adult hospital units, the emergency department, and three primary care practices. The change involved replacing previous education screening items with the BHLS. Implementation was based on a quality improvement framework, with a focus on acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity and sustainability. Support was gained from nursing leadership, education and training was provided, a documentation change was rolled out, feedback was obtained, and uptake of the new health literacy screening items was monitored. Results Between November 2010 and April 2012, there were 55,611 adult inpatient admissions, and from November 2010 to September 2011, 23,186 adult patients made 39,595 clinic visits to the three primary care practices. The completion (uptake) rate in the hospital for November 2010 through April 2012 was 91.8%. For outpatient clinics, the completion rate between November 2010 and October 2011 was 66.6%. Conclusions Although challenges exist, it is feasible to incorporate health literacy screening into clinical assessment and EHR documentation. Next steps are to evaluate the association of health literacy with processes and outcomes of care across inpatient and outpatient populations.
BackgroundMore than 30% of patients hospitalized for heart failure are rehospitalized or die within 90 days of discharge. Lower health literacy is associated with mortality among outpatients with chronic heart failure; little is known about this relationship after hospitalization for acute heart failure.Methods and ResultsPatients hospitalized for acute heart failure and discharged home between November 2010 and June 2013 were followed through December 31, 2013. Nurses administered the Brief Health Literacy Screen at admission; low health literacy was defined as Brief Health Literacy Screen ≤9. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were time to first rehospitalization and, separately, time to first emergency department visit within 90 days of discharge. Cox proportional hazards models determined their relationships with health literacy, adjusting for age, gender, race, insurance, education, comorbidity, and hospital length of stay. For the 1379 patients, average age was 63.1 years, 566 (41.0%) were female, and 324 (23.5%) had low health literacy. Median follow-up was 20.7 months (interquartile range 12.8 to 29.6 months), and 403 (29.2%) patients died. Adjusted hazard ratio for death among patients with low health literacy was 1.34 (95% CI 1.04, 1.73, P=0.02) compared to Brief Health Literacy Screen >9. Within 90 days of discharge, there were 415 (30.1%) rehospitalizations and 201 (14.6%) emergency department visits, with no evident association with health literacy.ConclusionsLower health literacy was associated with increased risk of death after hospitalization for acute heart failure. There was no evident relationship between health literacy and 90-day rehospitalization or emergency department visits.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations 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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.