Handling Sticky Situations

In our day-to-day CMM (Continuous Medication Monitoring), we regularly are making interventions and documenting the clinically relevant outcomes of our patients. One of the advantages of having a clinically oriented system like PharmClin is that it allows the pharmacist to see what has been done about an issue before, and schedule a follow-up assessment in the future. But not all pharmacists handle situations the same way. Sometimes a problem comes to you that should have already been addressed (and apparently was not). This creates a situation where we are dealing with a lack of inertia. The process SHOULD have already started, but because it hasn’t yet, where do I start? This is one such sticky story.

Origin of a Problem

Every story has a start, and this story starts out with a drug-drug interaction. Every drug-drug interaction has a first dispense of the second (and therefore triggering) drug. This story starts out with a patient taking Bupropion SR 150 (dating back many years). Later, a cardiologist added flecainide 50 mg  to treat an arrhythmia. At this point, the pharmacy management system undoubtedly flagged an interaction, and the pharmacist springs into action.

Facts and Comparisons classifies this interaction as significant (1) with a delayed onset, and potentially significant severity. The documentation referenced is rated as suspected. The pharmacologic effects of flecainide may be increased by the bupropion, caused by an elevation of plasma concentrations (mechanism of CYP2D6 Inhibition) resulting in potential toxicity (QT prolongation/Torsades de Pointes). In a nutshell, this is a potentially big deal.

The Easy Case

If you happened to be the pharmacist checking the first fill of the flecainide, then your job is the easiest. But is it any less sticky? Consider some possible interventions the pharmacist might make:

  1. The pharmacist alerts the cardiologist of the interaction
    • Possible Outcome: Cardiologist is concerned but considers this therapy most appropriate for patients cardiac related disease process. Requests that the pharmacist contact PCP to change antidepressant.
    • Possible Outcome: Cardiologist is aware of the interaction and not concerned. Will be monitoring EKG for QT prolongation and titrating dose to the desired clinical response. Wants the drug dispensed.
  2. The pharmacist alerts the Primary Care Physician (PCP) of the interaction
    • Possible Outcome: PCP changes medication for depression to Sertraline or other non-interaction medication and undertakes new monitoring for depression due to change in therapy.
    • Possible Outcome: PCP satisfied with patient response to current antidepressant and does not want to risk any change. Is not concerned with the interaction as cardiologist will be monitoring the EKG for QT prolongation.
  3. The pharmacist could elect to do nothing, or fail to completely follow-thru with one or more of the above interventions.
  4. The pharmacist could complete the intervention and fail to document what was done and when to follow-up with this issue.

Notice that several scenarios create a sticky situation going forward, with the cardiologist electing to monitor the patient. This creates difficulty for the pharmacist later as eventually the PCP will assume responsibility for the flecainide as the specialist’s involvement wanes. How does one continue to ensure that this problem doesn’t later evolve into a real issue, with potentially deadly consequences.

Inertia

Consider the possibility that the pharmacist failed to complete or document an intervention above. The next pharmacist that sees this interaction (the first refill) may assume that something MUST have been done and that this interaction is acceptable. Because nothing was changed, we don’t need to change now. This is a problem of inertia, and this type of problem is not uncommon. Getting the pharmacy train back on track and moving forward takes effort!

Sticky Fingers

Now consider what your options to regain inertia with the problem are when, for whatever reason, this interaction appears in front of you months or even years down the road. The patient has been receiving the medications together for a prolonged amount of time. Based on your discussions with the patient, their depression and rhythm appear to be well managed without any significant issues. What should you do now?

A lot depends on what (if any) documentation the pharmacist has from the origin event discussed above. If there is documentation, the next steps are easier (though still non-trivial). If monitoring of the EKG was originally being used to manage the interaction, the pharmacist can assess (through the patient and / or the current prescriber) if regular EKGs are still being done and if any QT elongation has been observed. The intervention made now will simply be an extension of the previous intervention(s). It is important if these medications continue to be used together after the intervention, that there is a specified follow-up date associated with it so that the pharmacist can revisit the issue at a later date.

If nothing was done (or no documentation exists), the options available to the pharmacist are the same as they were before, with one significant difference: the patient is currently (likely) stable on both medications. Changing the antidepressant now will result in the patient needing to be evaluated for effectiveness of the new antidepressant AND eliminate the CYP2D6 inhibition, effecting the flecainide steady state in the blood (requiring a potential change in the dose of the second drug).

Documentation is Key

This is where pharmacists tend to fall down. Without a well-documented history, it is very difficult to regain inertia on a problem. Once you decide to take the time and effort, be sure that you leave a paper trail. Document what was done, who was involved, and what their responses were. Before you finalize your intervention, be sure to assign a follow-up date for the problem. Revisit the problem to be sure that it has not evolved into something more challenging.

Take Action!

Regardless of how the situation arises, it is not acceptable to let a lack of inertia prevent patient care. Doing nothing is not an option. Even if you inherit a sticky situation, it is up to you to be sure to make every encounter count.

Published by

Michael Deninger

Mike graduated from the University of Iowa with a BS in Pharmacy in 1991 and completed his Ph.D. in 1998. He has over 20 years of practice experience, over half of which is as a pharmacy owner. Areas of expertise also include technology in practice, including integration with data sources.

Discover more from The Thriving Pharmacist

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading