Introduction
The Medication compromise (MedRec) was implemented in 2009 after the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act mandated that it is presently required to be included to comply with the Electronic Health Record (EHR). Innovation in healthcare has to entail extensive use of technology, as well as ensuring that technology is linked in a way that takes into consideration electronic exchanges of patient data to enhance the overall quality of care.
According to Patel, Pevnick, and Kennelty (2019), prescription discrepancies are identified and resolved using the MedRec tool, which is integrated into the EHR and is meant to prevent unpleasant medication events (ADEs) from occurring. Due to the CDC’s designation of a fragmented MedRec as Limited Use (LU), an association cannot participate in promotional programs due to this designation. The possibility of making a medication mistake exists in the event that the supplier does not have pharmaceuticals available at the time of confirmation, transportation, or delivery.
Due to these discrepancies, a patient is at risk of experiencing a poor reaction to a prescribed medication. A significant cause of injury and death in patients worldwide, adverse drug events (ADE) are a leading cause of death and disability.
Safety Issue
This application program (MedRec) is a medical wellness innovation that is integrated into a framework’s electronic health-record database. This method has several stages, including gathering the most complete and precise rundown of a patient’s current prescriptions and comparing it to those previously recorded in their records. The preceding step is then communicating the most exceptional rundown to the patient, their guardians, and any subsequent providers of care (Rangachari, 2018). The failure to do a MedRec increases the likelihood of suppliers making mistakes during reflection, which may result in ADE being triggered.
Duplication of drugs, organization of an off-base medication, exclusion of a suitable medication, and mistakes in the part, course, recurrence, and duration of medications are all examples of prescription blunders that may occur. Human error is also a factor in the development of the prescription error. Six percent of ADE results in severe harm to the patient, 33 percent result in serious mischief, and 61 percent result in no damage to the patient at all (Nanji, 2016).
It is estimated that between 30 and 70 percent of medication errors occur after a patient is released from the emergency department (Rangachari, 2018). It is a huge source of anxiety due to the fact that MedRec does not have the capability of correctly accommodating medications. Lack of clear responsibility and ownership among suppliers, for example, between the hospitalist and the essential doctor, regarding who is liable for overseeing and accommodating a patient’s prescription rundown prior to release, frequently results in a lack of commitment on the part of the care providers.
Stakeholders
A medication administration mistake may have immediate consequences for the patient, but it can also have far-reaching consequences for the whole pharmaceutical industry. According to the World Health Organization (2016), every year, the United States spends over 3.5 billion dollars to combat the ADE in its many forms. Successful medical executive plans demand the participation of essential partners such as experts and attendants, drug specialists, programming providers, and emergency clinic frameworks, all of whom have an influence at the same time and must all work together to achieve success.
Cureatr (2020) states that if a patient’s prescription history is incorrect at the time of affirmation, the lie may follow them throughout their treatment, potentially resulting in dangerous medication errors and greater costs for both the patient and the association. Patients are more vulnerable to medication errors during advancements in care, which is why efforts to improve quality and wellbeing during advancements in care are increasingly focusing on enhancing quality and security rather than on lowering costs. It is possible that increasing supplier investment in the MedRec culmination cycle may help to reduce medication errors and, as a result, improve patient safety.
Goal
The fact that many clinics do not have a dedicated individual who is responsible for ensuring that the patient’s prescription rundown is correct and complete creates some uncertainty as to who should complete the MedRec form. The component of the MedRec project is a key component in advancing supplier consistency, obligation, and participation in the MedRec interaction. This component aims to reduce hostile events and work on silent security.
Outcomes
Implementing Social Knowledge Networking (SKN) has resulted in a large increase in medical research innovation in both the LU and MU recommendation. Experiments conducted in the United States and Canada have shown that the MedRec innovation greatly reduces solution botches and unpleasant medicine circumstances (ADE). When a MedRec is done, mistakes such as overlooking therapy, offering an already terminated solution, recommending the incorrect medicine, dosage, or recurrence, and reiterating treatment after discharge are avoided. A standard medication audit system that is implemented at the time of confirmation, movement, and delivery reduces medicine errors by 50-94 percent, and those that have the potential to cause damage are reduced by the majority of the time. Also related with improved long-term outcomes is a lower likelihood of readmissions, which is a consequence of the methodology’s use.
Safe Practice
An improvement in patient-safe culture is required for the successful implementation of a Social Knowledge Networking (SKN) framework, which includes a conscious awareness of qualities, convictions, and standards regarding what is fundamental in an association and what perspectives and activities related to patient wellbeing are empowered (Mekonnen et al., 2016). The use of innovation in and of itself is not a problem; rather, the misuse of innovation has the potential to do damage to people.
Innovation in medical care is often dependent on the human administrators who implement the innovations in order to ensure its long-term security and sustainability. The usage of SKN devices proved beneficial in identifying and resolving medical care issues, including communication, while also establishing relationships with patients and their families, among other things (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2018). MedRec may be a cost-effective method of spending medical care dollars while also serving as a critical component of patient protection in the right circumstances.
Ethical considerations
Having a moral framework may assist medical services professionals in selecting how to supervise electronic information and data in accordance with moral standards at all stages of the information and data’s collection, storage, change, and transmission (These principles are supported by a web-based Practice Problems Reporting Tool and SKN devices that enable clinicians to communicate practice concerns related to MedRec while maintaining patient categorization confidentiality. Information about the patients was sent to a secure private server (Adane, Gizachew & Kendie, 2019).
Regulatory considerations.
An important component of the SKN model was a collection of tools that included the Reporting Platform and the SKN/Discussion Tool, which made use of Microsoft Yammer as a specific device that was coordinated with the EMR. Yammer incorporates the enterprise-level security, consistency, and board capabilities of Microsoft 365, which may aid in the protection of sensitive data. The inquiry into the Office administrator’s focus and Yammer’s experiences make it easier to analyze exercises and evaluate their influence on the office administrator’s focus. In addition, since MedRec is integrated into the EHR, the privacy and security of patient wellness data are guaranteed. Private discussion meetings are used to facilitate communication amongst experts.
Standards of practice
The SKN model was developed in accordance with the requirements of the industry for its execution and implementation. Theory, norms, and ideas from rational sciences were introduced into informatics practice, and this practice was developed. Informatics arrangements were planned, improved, determined, executed, and evaluated using ergonomics and human-computer cooperation (HCI) principles, which were then integrated into evaluating those arrangements. Determine the social, legal, and moral repercussions of informatics set up in relation to nursing and medical care methodically and thoroughly.
Framework of an Informatics Model
It was critical to use the Social Knowledge Networking (SKN) model as the organizational structure in order to shift the cycle and the viewpoints of suppliers toward MedRec. Associations can’t change until they have authoritative recognition, which necessitates the dissemination of training-based knowledge to pique interest and increase aggregate picking up, as suggested by the concept of social learning organizations (Rangachari, Dellsperger & Rethemeyer, 2019). SKN was also applied in this capacity to get insight into the beneficial communication network structures that exist in a jumbled professional framework, among other things.
SKN utilizes a hierarchical correspondence request, to draw in physicians, medical assistants, and drug specialists who work together to practically put together information exchange on issues related to MedRec to encourage aggregate learning and practice change to encourage aggregate learning and practice change to cultivate aggregate learning and practice change to cultivate aggregate learning and practice change to cultivate aggregate learning and practice change
References
Adane, K., Gizachew, M., & Kendie, S. (2019). The role of medical data in efficient patient care delivery: a review. Risk management and healthcare policy, 12, 67.
Cureatr. (2020). Medication reconciliation: the key patient safety issue for healthcare providers. Retrieved from: https://www.cureatr.com/medication-reconciliation-the-key-patientsafety-issue-for-healthcare-providers
Nanji, K. C., Patel, A., Shaikh, S., Seger, D. L., & Bates, D. W. (2016). Evaluation of perioperative medication errors and adverse drug events. Anesthesiology, 124(1), 25-34.
McGonigle, D. & Mastrian, K. (2018). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge.
Mekonnen, A.B., Abebe, T.B., McLachlan, A.J. & Brien, J.E. (2016). Impact of electronic medication reconciliation interventions on medication discrepancies at hospital transitions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 16(112): 1-14.
Patel, E., Pevnick, J.M. & Kennelty, K.A. (2019). Pharmacists and medication reconciliation: a review of recent literature. Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice; 8:39- 45.
Patient Safety Network (PSNET). (2019). Medication Reconciliation. Retrieved from: https://psnet.ahrq.gov/primer/medication-reconciliation
Rangachari, P. (2018). Implementing a social knowledge networking (SKN) system to enable meaningful use of an EHR medication reconciliation system. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 11:45-53.
World Health Organization. (2016). Medication errors.
write