Return to Home Page
Primary Care Pharmacy November 1999 Vol 1 No 1 p

Looking at anticoagulation services

By Sheena Macgregor, MSc, MRPharmS

An audit tool has been developed by a team of pharmacists

Audit is a method whereby objective data can be critically examined to assess, evaluate and improve patient care via a systematic approach. Many pharmacists have a role in primary care to facilitate the implementation of national guidelines and to ensure that medicines are used appropriately and safely to maximise health gain for patients. Audit of current services, which are either undertaken by other primary health care professionals or by pharmacists themselves, can identify areas of practice which are in need of review and improvement. Audit templates, which have already been piloted, can provide a useful basis for adaptation to suit local needs. This article looks at a template for audit of anticoagulation.
In the United Kingdom it has been estimated that 300,000 patients are prescribed oral anticoagulants. The number of patients suitable for anticoagulation is increasing, with evidence that patients with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation benefit. This increase in patient numbers has created pressure on existing hospital clinics, leading to a move to find alternative models of service provision within primary care. Models may vary from pharmacist or nurse-led clinics using near-patient testing in the GP surgery1 or community pharmacy,2 to nurses taking blood samples in the GP surgery, which are then sent to a central haematology laboratory for INR determination, the results being faxed, telephoned or electronically sent back within a few hours. Results are then interpreted and patients telephoned with instructions for dosage adjustment. Audit of anticoagulant care frequently indicates less than optimum therapeutic control and lack of standardisation of care within British Society for Haematology guidelines.3
An audit of an individual practice provides an opportunity to address quality issues identified, and to ensure consistency of the standards of care provision to patients. The audit tool described here was developed by a team of pharmacists from a range of specialties including hospital, community and quality assurance (see below). It covers critical components of the service, including documentation, procedures, INR monitoring and instrumentation. The service quality, efficiency and effectiveness are also evaluated. Initially, we developed practice standards based on the British Society for Haematology guidelines. This also produced a framework for continuous quality improvement of anticoagulant care, which could be reviewed in the light of changes in evidence or national guideline recommendations on a regular basis. The pharmacists involved used the outcomes for peer review sessions.

The audit process

A series of eight standards are assessed using a checklist approach. The auditor randomly selects a sample of either 25 per cent of the patients managed or 50 patients, whichever is smaller, and completes each individual audit checklist. Records for the previous six months are reviewed.

References

1. Hall J, Radley AS. The establishment of a pharmacist-developed anticoagulant clinic. Pharm J 1994;252:91-20
2. Macgregor SH, Hamley JC, Dunbar JA et al. BMJ 1996;312:560.
3. British Society of Haematology. Br J of Haematology 1998;101:374-387

Acknowledgements

The audit tool was developed by: Gillian Cruickshank, quality of service pharmacist, Dundee teaching hospitals NHS trust (now practice pharmacist, Dundee), Elizabeth King, senior clinical pharmacist, Perth and Kinross NHS trust, Andrew McGuire, practice pharmacist, Dunkeld, and Sheena Macgregor, senior prescribing adviser, Borders primary care trust

Sheena Macgregor is senior prescribing adviser, Borders primary care trust

STANDARD TARGET ACTUAL
STANDARD 1    
Documented procedures will be available for all key areas/activities:    
  • aims and objectives
  • YES/NO  
  • statement of responsibility
  • YES/NO  
  • training of staff
  • YES/NO  
  • referral systems
  • YES/NO  
  • BSH guidelines
  • YES/NO  
  • clinic visits assessment, INR monitoring, doses prescribed
  • YES/NO  
  • education of anticoagulant patients
  • YES/NO  
  • end of treatment
  • YES/NO  
  • critical incident or problem
  • YES/NO  
  • monitoring and evaluation of service
  • YES/NO  
    Instrument procedures will be available for:    
  • internal QA
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • maintenance of the instrument
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • registration with NEQAs
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • back up procedures in the event of instrument failure
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • staff training
  • YES/NO/NA  
    All documents will be:    
  • dated and current
  • YES/NO/NA  
      Max. = No  
      Target = …….%  
    STANDARD 2    
    For each patient a documentation system will contain:    
  • a referral form
  • YES/NO  
  • review of case notes form
  • YES/NO  
  • counselling checklist
  • YES/NO  
  • an anticoagulant monitoring record
  • YES/NO  
  • medicine interactions sheet placed in medical notes
  • YES/NO  
      Max. = 5 x No  
      Target = ……%  
    STANDARD 3    
    Each patient on anticoagulant therapy will have documentation recording:    
  • target INR
  • YES/NO  
  • monitoring frequency
  • YES/NO  
  • INRs measurements
  • YES/NO  
    50% of last INRs will be within target +/– 0.5units YES/NO  
    80% of last INRs will be within target +/– 0.75units YES/NO  
    If outwith this range, further action has been documented YES/NO  
    Max = 6 x No    
      Target = …….%  
    STANDARD 4    
    A patient review process will be regularly applied to monitor the frequency of patient reviews and failure to attend    
  • percentage of patients reviewed within 8 weeks
  • ....%  
  • percentage of patients failing to attend and not followed up
  • ....%  
    STANDARD 5    
    For each patient with relevant complications a critical incident process will be adhered to.    
  • a process to monitor and review complications is in place
  • YES/NO  
  • critical incident report exists for all patients with a complication
  • …% completed  
    A critical incident report was completed because    
  • INR < 1.5 or > 6
  • ...%  
  • signs or symptoms of bleeding
  • ...%  
  • signs or symptoms of thromboembolism
  • ...%  
  • patients required other medical attention
  • ...%  
  • other complications, please specify
  • ...%  
    STANDARD 6    
    A suitable competency based training scheme will be followed and monitored.    
  • clinic personnel hold documented evidence of competency training
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • clinic personnel hold documented evidence of ongoing appraisal and proficiency
  • YES/NO/NA  
    Key competencies will include:    
  • knowledge of clinical management protocols
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • haematological testing
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • adjustment in anticoagulant dosing
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • giving information and advice to patients
  • YES/NO/NA  
      Max = 6 x No  
      Target = ……%  
    STANDARD 7    
    The anticoagulant instrumentation will comply with set criteria to ensure continued quality, via internal and external calibration processes.    
    Internal:    
  • routinely calibrated using standard preparations
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • instrument registered directly with a national QA system ie, NEQAS or accepted laboratory
  • YES/NO/NA  
    Internal and external calibration results:    
  • are documented
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • reviewed regularly to identify trends
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • if outwith pre-set limits action taken is documented
  • YES/NO/NA  
    Instrument failure:    
  • is documented
  • YES/NO/NA  
  • as is action taken to rectify failure
  • YES/NO/NA  
    Cleaning, maintenance and service procedures    
  • are documented
  • YES/NO/NA  
    Instrument training    
  • clinic personnel hold documented evidence of competency
  • YES/NO/NA  
      Max = 9 x No  
      Target = …….%  
    STANDARD 8    
    A patient satisfaction survey will be regularly applied to assess acceptability and quality of service to patients.    
    Key areas may include:    
  • acceptibility of service
  • YES/NO  
  • satisfaction with frequency of clinic visits
  • YES/NO  
  • satisfaction with patient waiting times at the clinic
  • YES/NO  
  • satisfaction with staff involved
  • YES/NO  
  • privacy sufficient
  • YES/NO  
  • advice given and understood
  • YES/NO  
  • questions adequately answered
  • YES/NO  
  • overall satisfaction with the service
  • YES/NO  
  • comments for improving the service
  • YES/NO  
      Max = 8 x No  
      Target = ……..%