Digital Applications Targeting Medication Safety in Ambulatory High-Risk CKD Patients

Abstract

Background and objectives Patients with CKD are at risk for adverse drug reactions, but effective community-based preventive programs remain elusive. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of two digital applications designed to improve outpatient medication safety. Design, setting, participants, & measurements In a 1-year randomized controlled trial, 182 outpatients with advanced CKD were randomly assigned to receive a smartphone preloaded with either eKidneyCare (n=89) or MyMedRec (n=93). The experimental intervention, eKidneyCare, includes a medication feature that prompted patients to review medications monthly and report changes, additions, or medication problems to clinicians for reconciliation and early intervention. The active comparator was MyMedRec, a commercially available, standalone application for storing medication and other health information that can be shared with patients' providers. The primary outcome was the rate of medication discrepancy, defined as differences between the patient’s reported history and the clinic’s medication record, at exit. Results At exit, the eKidneyCare group had fewer total medication discrepancies compared with MyMedRec (median, 0.45; interquartile range, 0.33–0.63 versus 0.67; interquartile range, 0.40–1.00; P=0.001), and the change from baseline was 0.13±0.27 in eKidneyCare and 0.30±0.41 in MyMedRec (P=0.007). eKidneyCare use also reduced the severity of clinically relevant medication discrepancies in all categories, including those with the potential to cause serious harm (estimated rate ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 0.63). Usage data revealed that 72% of patients randomized to eKidneyCare completed one or more medication reviews per month, whereas only 30% of patients in the MyMedRec group (adjusted for dropouts) kept their medication profile on their phone. Conclusions In patients who are high risk and have CKD, eKidneyCare significantly reduced the rate and severity of medication discrepancies, the proximal cause of medication errors, compared with the active comparator. Clinical Trial registry name and registration number: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT:02905474.

Effect of mHealth Training on Treatment Adherence in Hemodialysis Patients

“…Ong et al showed that using mobile phone applica- tions prevents the progression of symptoms of a person's disease and improves their awareness of taking medicines, precautions, and possible side effects. On the other hand, these applications significantly reduce medication errors and help patients to comply more effectively with the treatment (46). Following the findings of these studies, training interventions can improve patients' awareness of the disease, symptoms, and treatment adherence.…”

Use of nephrotoxic medications in adults with chronic kidney disease in Swedish and US routine care

“…Stephanie et al. [ 48 ] evaluated a community-based digital intervention involving both patient and clinician and found the 1-year implementation largely reduced the rate and severity of medication discrepancies (proximal cause of medical errors) in high-risk CKD patients.…”

Implementation of medication reconciliation in outpatient cancer care

“…Additionally, findings of the environmental scan indicated that patients should be leveraged to more actively participate in collection and maintenance of their own medication records as a possible change idea. In a cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease, Ong et al previously trialled the utilisation of a smartphone-based app to prompt patients to undertake a monthly medication review and report changes, additions or problems to their clinicians for reconciliation and early intervention which was associated with high uptake and a significant reduction in the number and severity of medication discrepancies 30. However, feedback from nurses involved in collecting BPMHs at our centre demonstrated that patients often did not understand the importance of having an up-to-date medication list, did not know what their role should be in creating and maintaining it and/or did not know that clinicians did not have access a centralised list of medications that had been prescribed to them across multiple providers or organisations.…”