09.03.2015 Views

HP Newsletter - Hospice Pharmacia

HP Newsletter - Hospice Pharmacia

HP Newsletter - Hospice Pharmacia

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

8<br />

Passionate for the Appropriate Use of Medication<br />

“Proven and Safer...”<br />

continued from page 1<br />

“I forgot my PIN!”<br />

- Mark Schreiber, Technical Support<br />

Manager<br />

We are delighted that more than 80%<br />

of our hospice clients are participating<br />

in the PIN (Personal Identification<br />

Number) program. The purpose of the<br />

PIN program is to comply with HIPAA’s<br />

Privacy Rule.<br />

Just a reminder: Even if a hospice team<br />

member does not use Xeris, he or she<br />

still needs a Xeris account in order to<br />

obtain a PIN number, as we establish<br />

and keep record of nurse profiles in<br />

Xeris. Every <strong>HP</strong> hospice has selected<br />

a Xeris <strong>Hospice</strong> Administrator (XHA)<br />

who serves as the Xeris security liaison<br />

between the hospice and <strong>HP</strong>. The XHA<br />

is authorized to create Xeris accounts<br />

and reset Xeris passwords. Since PIN<br />

is managed through Xeris, your XHA is<br />

authorized to reset your PIN, should you<br />

forget it what it is.<br />

You may also consult the Xeris Reference<br />

Manual with questions. An updated<br />

version of this manual may be found<br />

on the Xeris Welcome Page in the “<strong>HP</strong><br />

Announcements” section.<br />

Your Regional Director of Client<br />

Development (RDCD) is available to<br />

assist with any of the above steps. If you<br />

have any further questions regarding<br />

PIN, please contact your RDCD, or email<br />

<strong>HP</strong>Partners@excelleRx.com. If you are<br />

an XHA and require technical assistance,<br />

feel free to contact our Technical Support<br />

team at support@excellerx.com.<br />

• Insomnia: A statistically significant<br />

number of patients receiving temazepam<br />

(a first line therapy for insomnia in the<br />

MUGs) achieved a complete response as<br />

compared with zolpidem (52% vs. 22%,<br />

p < 0.05).<br />

- This finding suggests that <strong>HP</strong>’s first<br />

line therapy of temazepam is more<br />

effective in treating insomnia than<br />

zolpidem, a common medication<br />

that is used outside of the insomnia<br />

protocol.<br />

• Nausea: A statistically significant<br />

proportion of patients receiving<br />

prochlorperazine (<strong>HP</strong>’s first line therapy<br />

for nausea) achieved a complete response<br />

as compared to patients taking oral<br />

ondansetron, an expensive alternative<br />

commonly prescribed in the oncology<br />

community (48.9% vs. 26.7%; p < 0.05).<br />

The study also found a striking difference<br />

between patient groups that experienced<br />

worsened nausea control after initiating<br />

therapy (8.9% for prochlorperazine vs.<br />

26.7% for ondansetron, p < 0.05).<br />

- This finding suggests that<br />

ondansetron is not superior to<br />

prochlorperazine, in treating<br />

nausea that is secondary to an<br />

unknown etiology (e.g. not receiving<br />

chemotherapy or radiation).<br />

We launched the aforementioned study<br />

to test the hypothesis that <strong>HP</strong>’s evidencebased<br />

Medication Use Guidelines are<br />

associated with better hospice and patientrelated<br />

outcomes. Our findings suggest<br />

that evidence-based prescribing using the<br />

MUGs produces better patient outcomes<br />

when compared to “preference-based”<br />

prescribing.<br />

In addition, while this study was not<br />

constructed to analyze the cost-effectiveness<br />

of the symptom management medications<br />

selected for analysis, it is noteworthy that<br />

<strong>HP</strong>’s first-line therapies in this study are<br />

less costly than the non-MUG medications<br />

to which they were compared.<br />

These findings support the application of<br />

the MUGs as evidence-based guidelines<br />

that both improve symptom management<br />

and assure cost-appropriate medication<br />

selection for hospice patients, especially<br />

when applied under the prescriberdirected,<br />

pharmacist-driven Collaborative<br />

Practice model.<br />

The bottom line: When the right medication<br />

is selected the first time and the patient is<br />

monitored for therapeutic and potential or<br />

actual adverse effects, patients are not just<br />

more comfortable, they experience greater<br />

safety from untoward adverse medication<br />

outcomes. “Proven and safer”—goals that<br />

should concern every one of us—are within<br />

reach and available to our health care<br />

system’s frailest patients including those<br />

who are receiving hospice care as they<br />

approach the end of life.<br />

1<br />

Leape, L.L. , and Berwick, D.M. (2005). Five years<br />

after To Err is Human: What have we learned? JAMA,<br />

293 (19), 2384-2390.<br />

2<br />

Kohn, K.T., Corrigan, J.M., & Donaldson, M.<br />

(1999). To err is human: Building a safer health care<br />

system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.<br />

excelleRx <strong>Newsletter</strong> Staff<br />

Editor In Chief:<br />

Orsula Voltis, PharmD, MBA<br />

Chief Marketing Officer<br />

orsula@excelleRx.com<br />

Managing Editor:<br />

Dana Filippoli<br />

Senior Director of Marketing<br />

dfilippoli@excelleRx.com<br />

Layout and Design:<br />

Melissa Morris<br />

Graphic Designer<br />

www.hospicepharmacia.com

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!