Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:05:58.904Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Audit of Prescribing Practices & Medication Monitoring on Learning Disability Female Low Secure Unit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2023

Rosie England*
Affiliation:
Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom
Ambreen Rashid
Affiliation:
Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom
*
*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

To ensure psychotropic medication is being prescribed and monitored as per Trust and national guidelines.

Methods

The audit included all patients admitted to the low secure female forensic unit at the time of data collection, giving a total of seven patients. Data were collected from medication charts, psychiatric report and clinical notes. The data collection tool looked at Mental Health Act (MHA) status, diagnoses, current psychotropic and physical health medication, documented indications, consent to treatment forms, completed capacity assessment forms, last medication review and recent physical health monitoring. For patients prescribed Clozapine, frequency of blood testing was checked. For patients prescribed Sodium Valproate, completion of annual risk acknowledgement forms was checked.

Results

The following audit standards were met with 100% compliance: "For patients on regular psychotropic medication, there should be clear indications for this on the drug chart." "All patients on combined antipsychotic therapy or High Dose Antipsychotic Therapy should have a care plan in place." "For patients detained under the MHA, appropriate Consent to Treatment forms should be present and up to date." "All patients should have a documented annual health check within the last 12 months." "All patients prescribed psychotropics should have psychotropic blood monitoring within last 12 months."

The compliance for the standard “For patients detained under the MHA, appropriate capacity assessment documented on MHA 58 Assessment of Capacity for Treatment form should be present and uploaded to Carenotes” was 71%.

The compliance for the standard “All female patients of childbearing age prescribed Valproate should have an annual Risk Acknowledgment form completed” was 0%.

Conclusion

There was a good standard of documentation of medication and indications on drug charts. Consent to Treatment forms were up to date for all patients. Semi-sodium Valproate and antipsychotic medication used out of license was within Trust guidance. Sodium Valproate was used off license in three patients. Monthly FBC blood monitoring occurred for patients on Clozapine, with the most recent Clozapine level within the last 12 months. Physical health checks and investigations were carried out annually for all patients. However, it was difficult to locate all results. Areas for improvement included: All investigation reports should be uploaded in the same folders with easily identifiable file names for ease of access. All patients on Valproate should have a completed annual risk acknowledgement form. The audit recommendation was to put in place care plans for all patients prescribed Valproate therapy, including review dates for risk acknowledgement forms.

Type
Audit
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This does not need to be placed under each abstract, just each page is fine.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.