WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Drug-related problems (DRPs) are a growing healthcare burden worldwide. In an ongoing cluster-randomized controlled trial in Sweden (MedBridge), comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) including post-discharge follow-up have been conducted in older hospitalized patients to prevent and solve DRPs. As part of a process evaluation of the MedBridge trial, this study aimed to assess the intervention fidelity and process outcomes of the trial's interventions.

METHODS: For intervention delivery, the percentage of patients that received intervention components was calculated per study group. Process outcomes, measured in about one-third of all intervention patients, included the following: the number of identified medication discrepancies, DRPs and recommendations to solve DRPs, correction rate of discrepancies, and implementation rate of recommendations.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The MedBridge trial included 2637 patients (mean age: 81 years). The percentage of intervention patients (n = 1745) that received the intended intervention components was 94%-98% during admission, and 40%-81% upon and after discharge. The percentage of control patients (n = 892) that received at least one unintended intervention component was 15%. On average, 1.1 discrepancies and 2.0 DRPs were identified in 652 intervention patients. The correction and implementation rates were 79% and 73%, respectively. Stop medication was the most frequently implemented recommendation (n = 293) and 77% of the patients had at least one corrected discrepancy or implemented recommendation.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The intervention fidelity within the MedBridge trial was high for CMRs during hospital stay and lower for intervention components upon and after discharge. The high prevalence of corrected discrepancies and implemented recommendations may explain potential effects of CMRs in the MedBridge trial.

BACKGROUND: The discharge of older hospitalised patients is critical in terms of patient safety. Inadequate transfer of information about medications to the next healthcare provider is a known problem, but there is a lack of understanding of this problem in settings where shared electronic health records are used. The aims of this study were to evaluate the prevalence of patients for whom hospitals sent adequate requests for medication-related follow-up at discharge, the proportion of patients with unplanned hospital revisits because of inadequate follow-up requests, and the association between medication reviews performed during hospitalisation and adequate or inadequate follow-up requests.

METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review. The study population was randomly selected from a cluster-randomised crossover trial which included patients 65 years or older who had been admitted to three hospitals in Sweden with shared electronic health records between hospital and primary care. Each patient was assessed with respect to the adequacy of the request for follow-up. For patients where the hospitals sent inadequate requests, data about any unplanned hospital revisits were collected, and we assessed whether the inadequate requests had contributed to the revisits. The association between medication reviews and adequate or inadequate requests was analysed with a Chi-square test.

RESULTS: A total of 699 patients were included. The patients' mean age was 80 years; an average of 10 medications each were prescribed on hospital admission. The hospitals sent an adequate request for 418 (60%) patients. Thirty-eight patients (14%) had a hospital revisit within six months of discharge which was related to an inadequate request. The proportion of adequate or inadequate requests did not differ between patients who had received a medication review during hospitalisation and those who had not (p = 0.83).

CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of patients for whom the hospitals sent adequate follow-up requests on discharge was low. More than one in every ten who had an inadequate request revisited hospital within six months of discharge for reasons related to the request. Medication reviews conducted during hospitalisation did not affect the proportion of adequate or inadequate requests sent. A communication gap still exists despite the usage of a shared electronic health record between primary and secondary care levels.

Background: Hospital discharge of older patients is a high-risk situation in terms of patient safety. Due to the fragmentation of the healthcare system, communication and coordination between stakeholders are required at discharge. The aim of this study was to explore communication in general and medication information transfer in particular at hospital discharge of older patients from the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCPs) across different organisations within the healthcare system.

Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using focus group and individual or group interviews with HCPs (physicians, nurses and pharmacists) across different healthcare organisations in Sweden. Data were collected from September to October 2021. A semi-structured interview guide including questions on current medication communication practices, possible improvements and feedback on suggestions for alternative processes was used. The data were analysed thematically, guided by the systematic text condensation method.

Results: In total, four focus group and three semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 HCPs. Three main themes were identified: 1) Support systems that help and hinder describes the use of support systems in the discharge process to compensate for the fragmentation of the healthcare system and the impact of these systems on HCPs' communication; 2) Communication between two separate worlds depicts the difficulties in communication experienced by HCPs in different healthcare organisations and how they cope with them; and 3) The large number of medically complex patients disrupts the communication reveals how the highly pressurised healthcare system impacts on HCPs' communication at hospital discharge.

Conclusions: Communication at hospital discharge is hindered by the fragmented, highly pressurised healthcare system. HCPs are at risk of moral distress when coping with communication difficulties. Improved communication methods at hospital discharge are needed for the benefit of both patients and HCPs.

BackgroundThe hospital discharge process poses significant safety risks for older patients due to complexities in communication and coordination among stakeholders, leading to potential drug-related problems post-discharge. Adopting a person-centred care (PCC) approach in medication communication by healthcare professionals (HCPs) is crucial to ensure positive health outcomes. This study aimed to explore the practice of PCC in medication communication between older patients and HCPs during the hospital discharge process.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study using non-participatory direct observations of patient-HCP consultations during hospital discharge, followed by semi-structured interviews with observed patients and, when applicable, their informal caregivers. Data collection occurred from October 2020 to May 2021 at two Swedish hospitals. We gathered data using an observational form and audio-recorded all consultations and interviews. The data were analysed thematically using the systematic text condensation method.ResultsTwenty patients were included (median age: 81 years [range: 65-94]; 9 female) in observations and 13 of them participated in interviews. Two patients were accompanied by an informal caregiver during the interviews. Three main themes were identified: (1) The impact of traditional authoritarian structures, depicts power dynamics between patients and their HCPs, showing how traditional structures influence the practice of PCC in medication communication during hospital discharge; (2) Consultation timing and mode not on patients' terms, describes suboptimal times and settings for consultations, along with the use of complex language that hinders effective communication; and (3) Discrepancy in expectations of self-care ability, illustrates a mismatch between the self-care guidance provided by HCPs during hospital discharge and the actual needs and preferences of patients and informal caregivers.ConclusionMedication communication between older patients and HCPs during hospital discharge is frequently inconsistent with the practice of PCC. Not only must HCPs improve their communication strategies, but patients and their informal caregivers should also be better prepared for discharge communication and encouraged to participate in their care. This involvement would give them relevant knowledge and tailor communication to their individual needs, preventing problems in managing their medications after discharge.Patient or Public ContributionAn advisory group of six patients and/or informal caregiver contributors provided input on the study design, edited the consent forms, and helped develop the interview guide.

Introduction: Care transitions, particularly hospital discharge, present significant risks to patient safety. Deficient medication-related discharge communication is a major contributor, posing a substantial risk of harm to older patients. This protocol outlines the Improved Medication Communication and Patient Involvement at Care Transitions (IMPACT-care) intervention study, designed to evaluate the effects of a multi-faceted intervention for older hospitalised patients on medication-related discharge communication compared to usual hospital care.

Methods and analysis: A pre-post intervention study will be conducted in two surgical and one geriatric ward of a university hospital in Sweden. The study will begin with a control period delivering care as usual, followed by a training period and then an intervention period. The intervention comprises four components performed by clinical pharmacists: (1) an information package provided to patients and/or their informal caregivers, (2) preparation of medication-related discharge documentation, (3) facilitation of discharge communication, and (4) a follow-up call to patients or their informal caregiver. Eligible participants are aged ≥ 65 years, manage their own medications independently or with informal caregiver support, and are admitted to the study wards. Both study periods (control and intervention) will last until a total of 115 patients have been included in each period. The primary outcome is the quality of medication-related discharge documentation, assessed using the Complete Medication Documentation at Discharge Measure (CMDD-M). Secondary outcomes include patients' perceptions of involvement in discharge medication communication and their confidence in post-discharge medication management, adherence to medication changes from hospitalisation that persist after discharge, and unplanned healthcare visits following discharge. A process evaluation is planned to explore how the intervention was implemented. Patient inclusion began in September 2024.

Ethics and dissemination: The study protocol has been approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (registration no.: 2023-03518-01 and 2024-04079-02). Results will be published in open-access international peer-reviewed journals, and presented at national and international conferences.

Trial registration number: NCT06610214