Approaches to medication history taking in different hospital settings

• Verfasst von: Terstegen, Theresa [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Niestroj, Christina [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Stangl, Julia [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Scherkl, Camilo [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Morath, Benedict [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Haefeli, Walter E. [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Seidling, Hanna [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Approaches to medication history taking in different hospital settings
• Titelzusatz: a scoping review
• Verf.angabe: Theresa Terstegen, Christina Niestroj, Julia Stangl, Camilo Scherkl, Benedict Morath, Walter E. Haefeli, Hanna M. Seidling
• E-Jahr: 2024
• Jahr: August 1, 2024
• Umfang: 12 S.
• Illustrationen: Illustrationen
• Fussnoten: Veröffentlicht: 25. April 2024, Korrektur und Schriftsatz: 24. Juni 2024 ; Gesehen am 24.03.2025
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: AJHP
• Ort Quelle: Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1995
• Jahr Quelle: 2024
• Band/Heft Quelle: 81(2024), 15 vom: Aug., Seite e419-e430
• ISSN Quelle: 1535-2900
• DOI: doi:10.1093/ajhp/zxae112
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• K10plus-PPN: 1920384901

Abstract

A comprehensive medication history can contribute to safe therapy. Many approaches aiming to improve medication history taking require significant human resources. To design an efficient process that delivers high-quality medication histories, the individual requirements and resources of a given setting need to be considered. We aimed to provide an overview of existing approaches to medication history taking and their performance in different settings to potentially support the selection of an appropriate procedure.We searched 3 literature databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO) for publications on approaches to medication history taking and analyzed them with regard to their key components as well as the setting, patient population, assessed outcomes, and efficacy.In total, 65 publications were included and analyzed. The majority of the reported approaches relied on involvement of dedicated staff (n = 43), followed by process-oriented interventions (eg, checklists; n = 15) and information technology (IT)-guided interventions (n = 11). A mean (SD) of 6 (2.9) outcomes were described in each study. Medication discrepancies were reported in 89% of all studies, yet about 75 different descriptions of this outcome were used, making it difficult to compare study results. Only 11 studies applied a sample size calculation and statistical tests. Of those, 10 reported a positive effect of their respective intervention on the quality of medication histories.Most approaches focused on pharmacy staff, which are associated with considerable cost and resources. Therefore, IT-based approaches and patient engagement should be investigated as cost-effective alternatives and tested for superiority in the same setting. Reporting guidelines and standardized methodology are needed to improve the comparability of such studies.