BackgroundRecent studies have documented high rates of non-administration of ordered venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis doses. Intervention strategies that target all patients have been effective, but prohibitively resource-intensive. We aimed to identify efficient intervention strategies based on patterns of non-administration of ordered VTE prophylaxis.Methods and FindingsIn this retrospective review of electronic medication administration records, we included adult hospitalized patients who were ordered pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin over a seven-month period. The primary measure was the proportion of ordered doses of VTE prophylaxis not administered, assessed at the patient, floor, and floor type levels. Differences in non-administration rates between groups were assessed using generalized estimating equations. A total of 103,160 ordered VTE prophylaxis doses during 10,516 patient visits on twenty-nine patient floors were analyzed. Overall, 11.9% of ordered doses were not administered. Approximately 19% of patients missed at least one quarter and 8% of patients missed over one half of ordered doses. There was marked heterogeneity in non-administration rate at the floor level (range: 5–27%). Patients on medicine floors missed a significantly larger proportion (18%) of ordered doses compared to patients on other floor types (8%, Odds Ratio: 2.4, p<0.0001). However, more than half of patients received at least 86% of their ordered doses, even on the lowest performing floor. The 20% of patients who missed at least two ordered doses accounted for 80% of all missed doses.ConclusionsA substantial proportion of ordered doses of VTE prophylaxis were not administered. The heterogeneity in non-administration rate between patients, floors, and floor types can be used to target interventions. The small proportion of patients that missed multiple ordered doses accounted for a large majority of non-administered doses. This recognition of the Pareto principle provides opportunity to efficiently target a relatively small group of patients for intervention.

No abstract

No abstract

*Objective: To introduce pharmacists to the process, challenges, and opportunities of creating transitions of care (TOC) models in the inpatient, ambulatory, and community practice settings. Methods: TOC literature and resources were obtained through searching PubMed, Ovid, and GoogleScholar. The pharmacist clinicians, who are the authors in this manuscript are reporting their experiences in the development, implementation of, and practice within the TOC models. Results: Pharmacists are an essential part of the multidisciplinary team and play a key role in providing care to patients as they move between health care settings or from a health care setting to home. Pharmacists can participate in many aspects of the inpatient, ambulatory care, and community pharmacy practice settings to implement and ensure optimal TOC processes. This article describes establishing the pharmacist's TOC role and practicing within multiple health care settings. In these models, pharmacists focus on medication reconciliation, discharge counseling, and optimization of medications. Additionally, a checklist has been created to assist other pharmacists in developing the pharmacist's TOC roles in a practice environment or incorporating more TOC elements in their practice setting. *

A291telephone counseling can significantly improve blood pressure control. Our data show also that interventions run by allied health professionals (i.e. other than the prescriber/doctor), improve adherence to medicines and promote hypertension-related health behaviors.