Medication reconciliation: comparing a customized medication history form to a standard medication form in a specialty clinic (CAMPII 2).

Ryan GJ1, Caudle JM, Rhee MK, Hickman JM, Tsui CW, Barnes CS, Haomia J, Ziemer DC.

Author information

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Medication history forms completed by patients are an essential part of the medication reconciliation process.

OBJECTIVE:

In a crossover prospective study, investigators compared the accuracy and acceptability of a "fill-in-the blank" medication history form (USUAL) to a customized form (CUSTOM) that contained a checklist of the 44 most frequently prescribed diabetes clinic medications.

METHODS:

The content of both forms was compared to a "gold-standard" medication list compiled by a clinical pharmacist who conducted a medication history and reviewed pharmacy profiles and medical chart. Subject preference and time to complete the forms were also determined. Accurate was defined as complete and correct (name, dose, and frequency) relative to the gold standard.

RESULTS:

A total of 77 subjects completed both forms. Complete list accuracy was poor; there was no difference in the accuracy between CUSTOM (6.5%) and USUAL (9.1%) (odds ratio [OR], 0.33; P = 0.62). Out of a total of 648 medications, subjects accurately listed 43.7% of medications on CUSTOM and 45.5% on USUAL (OR, 0.88; P = 0.41). The 44 medications on the checklist were more than twice as likely to be accurately reported using CUSTOM than with USUAL (OR, 2.1; P = 0.0002). More subjects preferred CUSTOM (65.7%) compared with USUAL (32.8%, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION:

Medication self-report is very poor, and few subjects created an accurate list on either form. Subjects were more likely to report the drugs on the checklist using CUSTOM than when they used USUAL; however, there was no difference in the overall accuracy between CUSTOM and USUAL.