Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T02:03:31.256Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An audit addressing the quality of prescribing sodium valproate in early intervention service

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2021

Humaira Aziz*
Affiliation:
Birmingham Community Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
Khushboo Khatri
Affiliation:
University hospital Birmingham
Sneha Upadhyaya
Affiliation:
University hospital Birmingham
*
*corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

This Audit aims to review prescribing practice concerning Valproate in early intervention services.

Method

The audit was undertaken across four EI hubs in Birmingham. Audit standards were derived from POMH-UK (Prescribing Observatory for Mental Health) QIP. Drug cards of the entire EIS caseload in November 2020 were reviewed to identify patients on any preparation of Valproate. A total of 31 patients were identified. Electronic notes of all the patients on Valproate were reviewed to compare prescribing practices against national standards.

Result

A total of 31 patients were prescribed sodium Valproate. All these patients had target symptoms documented in their notes. Reason for starting Valproate was mostly documented as agitation and aggression rather than elation in the mood. In was unclear if patients had full physical health checked before starting Valprotae as in majority (94%) valproate was commenced as an inpatient. Not all cases had detailed inpatient discharge notes making it difficult to fully understand the rationale for starting Valproate.

55% of the patients were on an off-license valproate preparation. Where used off-license majority (93%)of these patients had no documentation of the rationale behind off-license use. Similarly, in most cases (93%)there was no evidence of off-license use being discussed with the patients. Most patients had received adequate monitoring in the community (74%) although there was limited documentation of screening for common side effects. Prescribers were noted to be using Semi-sodium Valproate and Sodium Valproate interchangeably despite these not being bioequivalent.

Conclusion

We recommend that

  1. 1. Periodic treatment reviews should document the assessment of response and screening for side effects.

  2. 2. Where used clinician should clearly discuss and document the off-license use with patients. 500 mg Semi-sodium valproate (Depakote) is approximately equivalent to 433 mg Sodium Valproate (Epilim). If switching from Semi-sodium Valproate to Sodium Valproate, a slightly higher (approximately 10%) dose of Sodium Valproate should be used.

  3. 3. Unless clear evidence of affective illness is identified, the ongoing need for Valproate should be regularly reviewed by the clinicians.

Type
Audit
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.