PBS hospital medication chart development and background

Assessment to the NSQHS Standards
- The Impact of the NSQHS Standards
- National Standards Program updates and consultations
- NSQHS Standards (second edition)
  - Request for NSQHS Standards (second edition) commercial design files
  - Assessor Orientation Course Enrolment Form
- Information for health service organisations undergoing assessment to the NSQHS Standards
  - Steps for implementing the NSQHS Standards
- Information for dental practices undergoing assessment to the NSQHS Standards
- Information for accrediting agencies
- Resources to implement the NSQHS Standards (first edition)
  - Logo and icons request form
- NSQHS Standards Advisories (first edition)
- Australian Health Service Safety and Quality Accreditation Scheme
Clinical Care Standards
- Overview of the Clinical Care Standards
  - Clinical Care Standards Advisory Committee
- Current consultation
- Acute Coronary Syndromes Clinical Care Standard
  - Project Information
  - Endorsements
- Acute Stroke Clinical Care Standard
  - Project Information
  - Endorsements
- Antimicrobial Stewardship Clinical Care Standard
  - Project Information
  - Endorsements
- Cataract Clinical Care Standard
  - Project Information
- Colonoscopy Clinical Care Standard
  - Topic working group and endorsements
  - Colonoscopy Clinical Care standard pilot project
- Delirium Clinical Care Standard
  - Project Information
  - Endorsements
- Heavy Menstrual Bleeding Clinical Care Standard
  - Project Information
  - Endorsements
- Hip Fracture Care Clinical Care Standard
  - Project Information
- Osteoarthritis of the Knee
  - Project Information
  - Endorsements
- Third and fourth degree perineal tears
- Venous Thromboembolism Prevention Clinical Care Standard
  - Topic working group and endorsements
Clinical Communications
- Clinical Handover
- Patient-Clinician Communication
- Resources
  - External Links
  - Clinical Handover Presentations
Clinical Trials
- Clinical Trials Consultation
- Project Information
- Resources
Safe and high-quality care for patients with cognitive impairment
- Caring for Cognitive Impairment campaign
- A better way to care: Safe and high-quality care for patients with cognitive impairment (dementia and delirium) in hospital
Credentialing of clinicians
Colonoscopy Safety and Quality
Comprehensive Care
- Comprehensive Care Standard
- Conceptual model for Comprehensive Care
- Comprehensive Care Resources
- Essential elements for comprehensive care delivery
End-of-Life Care
- Information for patients, families and carers
- Tools and resources for health services
- Request End-of-Life Care Audit Tools
- End-of-life care projects across Australia
Falls Prevention
- Falls prevention resources
- Latest falls prevention research and practice
General Practice accreditation
- Accrediting agencies assessing general practices
Healthcare-Associated Infection Prevention Program
- Infection Prevention and Control Online Modules
- Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) and Healthcare Associated Infection (HAI) resources and links
- Antimicrobial Stewardship
- Infection Prevention and Control Signage
- Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriacaea (CPE) Guide
- National Hand Hygiene Initiative
  - Hand Hygiene Australia
- National Infection Control Guidelines
- National HAI Surveillance
- Clostridium difficile infection
Indicators of Safety and Quality
- Avoidable Hospital Readmissions
- Potentially preventable hospitalisations and potentially avoidable deaths in Australia
- Patient-Reported Outcome Measures
- Classification of Hospital Acquired Diagnoses
- Hospital-acquired complications
- Australian Sentinel Events List
- Core, Hospital-based Outcome Indicators
  - CHBOI Toolkit Terms of Use
- Australian Hospital Patient Experience Question Set (AHPEQS)
  - Review of patient experience and its measurement in Australian hospitals
- Practice-level indicators of safety and quality for primary health care
  - Practice-level indicators of safety and quality for primary health care consultation – Written Submissions
Information Strategy
- National arrangements for clinical quality registries
  - Testing and validating the Draft Operating Principles and Technical Standards
- Health Information Standards for Safety and Quality
Knee Pain
Live Literature Searches
Medication Safety
- Safer medicines administration
- Paediatric prescribing positioning statement
- High Risk Medicines
- NSMC audit system
- National Standard Medication Chart (NSMC) auditing
- NIMC National Audit Reports
- Medication charts
- NIMC VTE Prophylaxis Section
- Medication reconciliation
- Safer naming, labelling and packaging of medicines
- Electronic medication management
- Quality use of medicines in hospitals
  - Hospital QUM individual indicators
- Medication Safety Tools and Resources
- National Residential Medication Chart
- Paediatric National Inpatient Medication Charts
  - Paediatric NIMC Seminar 7 May 2009: Report
- NIMC Private Hospital and Private Hospital Day Surgery Versions
Mental Health
- National Standards in Mental Health Services
- Recognising and responding to clinical deterioration
- Medication Safety in Mental Health
- Mental Health Advisory Group
- Emergency mental health contact details
Open Disclosure
- The Australian Open Disclosure Framework
- Implementing the Open Disclosure Framework
- Open disclosure programs, policies and information
  - Open disclosure at Mater Health Services, Brisbane
- Open Disclosure projects and priorities
Information for Consumers
- Translated resources and alternative formats
- Specific health conditions
- Healthcare safety and quality
- Working with your healthcare providers
- Be aware of button batteries
Patient and Consumer Centred Care
- Person-centred healthcare organisations
- National Safety and Quality Health Service Standard 2: Partnering with Consumers
- Health Literacy
- Useful resources
Patient Identification
- Patient / Procedure Matching Protocols
- Specification for a standard patient identification band
Primary Health Care
- Consultation process on patient safety and quality improvement in primary health care (closed)
Prioritising clinical practice guideline development
Recognising and Responding to Clinical Deterioration
- Training and Competencies
- Recognising and Responding to Deterioration in Mental State
- Implementing Recognition and Response Systems
- Evaluating Recognition and Response Systems
  - Audit Tools and Quality Measures for Recognition and Response Systems
- Observation and Response Charts
- Tools and Resources to Support Implementation of the National Consensus Statement
- Past events
Safety in e-Health
- Certification framework for digital mental health services
- My Health Record clinical safety program
- My Health Record in Emergency Departments Project
- Electronic discharge summary (EDS) systems
- Safety Issues at Transitions of Care: Pain points relating to clinical systems
- Cumulative hospital-level antibiogram
- Structured microbiology requests and reports for healthcare-associated infections
Shared Decision Making
- Webinars on Shared Decision Making
- Decision support tools for patients
- Resources and publications
Transvaginal Mesh
- Resources for consumers, clinicians and health service organisations – transvaginal mesh
  - Care Pathway for the Management of Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI)
  - Care Pathway for the Management of Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP)
- Senate Inquiry
- States, territories and private health services
- Useful Links
- Consumer forums to discuss transvaginal mesh

Safety and Quality > Our Work > Medication Safety > Medication charts > Background and development of medication charts > PBS hospital medication chart development and background

The PBS HMC is an evidence-based chart that builds on the national inpatient medication chart (NIMC). It was trialled in public and private hospitals across Australia.

Healthcare services are expected to demonstrate the use of a compliant standardised chart for accreditation against National Safety and Quality Health Service (NSQHS) Standard 4: Medication Safety. The PBS HMC is a compliant standardised chart.

Only the PBS HMC can be used for PBS claiming. Noncompliant charts:

Are not reflected in any nationally maintained support materials, including education resources
May create medico-legal risks for health service organisations in the event of patient harm related to medication misadventure.

Benefits of the PBS HMC

Reduces the regulatory and administrative burden for health professionals
Improves efficiency and streamline processes for PBS prescribing, dispensing and claiming
Improves medication safety by reducing medicine transcription errors
Improves the quality use of medicines, including PBS medicines prescribed, dispensed and administered to patients in acute care settings
Improves workflow for healthcare providers.

Developing the PBS HMC

The Australian Government Department of Health appointed the Commission to develop the PBS HMC for use in public and private hospitals, and to test its safety and effectiveness. The aim was to reduce the administrative prescribing, dispensing and claiming for PBS medicines in hospitals.

A hospital trial assessed:

Safety and quality of the PBS HMC compared with the NIMC
Compliance with regulatory requirements for PBS data fields
Financial advantages to the hospital
Workflow utility and efficiencies for hospitals, clinicians and pharmacies.

The hospital trial found the safety performance of the PBS HMC compared favourably with the existing medication charts used at the trial sites. This finding was supported by chart audits and site reports. There were no medication incidents associated with the PBS HMC, and using the chart reduced medication transcription errors.

Additional details of the trial can be found in PBS Hospital Medication Chart (PBS HMC) project. Development, trial and evaluation of the PBS HMC in public and private hospitals: phase 1 summary evaluation report

Isolated rectocele	GoR*
Posterior Colporrhaphy (PC) is the procedure of choice	B
Levatorplasty associated with high rate of dyspareunia	B
PC reduced prolapse with equal functional outcome compared to transanal approach	B
Fascial plication is superior to site specific posterior vaginal repair	C
No evidence demonstrating benefit for synthetic or biological graft	C
Those with combined vaginal prolapse and bowel symptoms benefit from colorectal and gynaecologist collaboration	C
Ventral rectopexy and vaginal graft is unnecessary for isolated rectocele	D

Vault prolapse (post hysterectomy)	GoR*
Sacral colpopexy (SC) has significant anatomical and functional advantages when compared with a broad group of vaginal surgery (± mesh)	A
Transvaginal apical mesh confers no advantage when compared to native tissue repairs	A
Uterosacral and sacrospinous colpopexy have similar efficacy for apical prolapse	B
Laparoscopic SC has advantages over both robotic and open approach however the learning curve with the laparoscopic approach is significant	B
Sacrospinous ligament fixation and abdominal sacrocolpopexy have equivalent success rates	B
Vaginal apical suspensions appropriate in those not suitable for SC (Delphi)	C

	GoR*
Vaginal hysteropexy is equally effective as vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension and is associated with reduced blood loss and operating time	B
Vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension has a lower reoperation rate for prolapse than abdominal sacro-hysteropexy	B
Salpingectomy ↓ risk of ovarian cancer in women retaining ovaries at the time of hysterectomy	B
Bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) at hysterectomy in post-menopausal women ↓ rate of ovarian cancer without ↑ morbidity	B
SC with hysterectomy is not recommended due to high rate of mesh exposure	B
Supracervical hysterectomy has a lower rate of mesh exposure than hysterectomy and SC	B
Sacro-hysteropexy has a ↑ reoperation rate for prolapse than SC with hysterectomy	C
Supracervical hysterectomy has ↑ rate of recurrent POP compared to SC and hysterectomy	C
Although data is not complete, vaginal based apical suspensions should generally be considered for uterine prolapse reserving SC for recurrent or post hysterectomy prolapse	C

Isolated cystocele	GoR*
Anterior Colporrhaphy (AC) is generally recommended however permanent synthetic mesh could be considered for recurrent prolapse if women understand the risk/benefit profile	A
Non-autologous grafts offer no significant advantage over AC	B
Native tissue repair is recommended, but carries a higher risk of prolapse recurrence	B
Mesh repairs are associated with higher risk of adverse events	B
Mesh repair may be considered for recurrent prolapse after patient informed and accepts the risk/benefit	B
Adjunctive fascial slings may be used to prevent recurrent prolapse in high grade cystoceles	C

Prolapse surgery and lower urinary tract functions	GoR*
Women with POP + SUI
Surgery for POP + SUI shows a higher rate of cure of urinary incontinence in the short term	A
Combined POP + SUI surgery carries a higher risk of adverse events	A
Women with POP + occult SUI
POP + occult SUI equals POP and continence surgery (consider staged procedure)	B
Women with POP + occult SUI are at risk of development of incontinence post POP repair alone, with some proceeding to additional SUI surgery at a later date	A
Combined POP + SUI surgery reduces the risk of post operative incontinence	A
Combined POP + SUI surgery increases the risk of adverse events	A
Continent women with POP
POP without occult SUI does not require concomitant continence surgery	B
Women with POP and Overactive Bladder (OAB)
There is low level (inconsistent) evidence to suggest that operative repair can improve OAB symptoms	C

	GoR*
Perioperative physiotherapy did not reduce the rate of recurrent prolapse	A
Stage 3 or Stage 4 prolapse	B
Low volume surgeons have ↑ rate of complications compared to high volume surgeons	B
Patient age < 60 years	C
Less experienced surgeons have higher rates of recurrent prolapse after transvaginal surgery	C
Preoperative widened genital hiatus or levator defects on urinary signs and symptoms: data are inconclusive	D

	GoR*
Inferior outcomes to pubovaginal slings for primary repair, possibly with less voiding dysfunction	B
Outcomes similar or slightly less than synthetic MUS however longer operating time and recovery, slower return to activities of daily living and more prolapse in medium term	B
Laparoscopic approach when performed same technique as open has similar success rate with less morbidity than open approach	B
Lower rates of success, with higher retreatment rates, when compared to pubovaginal slings for primary repair	B

	GoR*
The most extensively researched option for SUI establishing efficacy and safety profile	A
As effective or more effective than colposuspension or pubovaginal sling with less perioperative and post-operative morbidity	B
Recommended surgical treatment female SUI	C

Retropubic versus transobturator mid-urethral sling	GoR*
In the short-term there are similar success rates for retropublic and transobturator	A
Obturator tapes slightly quicker, with less blood loss, bladder perforation and voiding dysfunction difficulties. Most of these differences were small and the complications are readily able to be managed.	A
However in the medium term (>5 years) the reoperation for recurrent SUI greater in obturator group and a small number developed groin pain (3-4%) that is difficult to treat.	B
Retropubic considered as the preferred procedure with transobturator reserved for those patients with a hostile abdomen	C

Retropubic versus transobturator mid-urethral sling	GoR*
In the short‐term there are similar success rates for retropubic and transobturator mid urethral slings	A
Obturator tapes are slightly quicker, with less blood loss, bladder perforation and voiding dysfunction difficulties. Most of these differences were small and the complications are readily able to be managed.	A
However in the medium term (>5 years) the reoperation for recurrent SUI greater in obturator group and a small number developed groin pain (3-4%) that is difficult to treat.	B
Retropubic considered as the preferred procedure with transobturator reserved for those patients with a hostile abdomen	C

Pubovaginal (fascial) sling	GoR*
Similar success rates compared to MUS with longer operating time and possibly higher voiding dysfunction; fascial sling has lower rates of chronic pelvic pain, no risk of erosion or extrusion, and higher rates of post‐operative morbidity	B
Lower rate of bladder perforation during surgery compared to MUS.	B
Fascial sling has higher patient satisfaction and treatment success compared to colposuspension	B
Involves a longer operation, post‐operative hospital stay (2–3 days) and recovery period than MUS	B
Consider in women wishing to avoid mesh‐related complications	–

	GoR*
May be a useful option for recurrent SUI with a well supported urethra	B
Greater symptomatic improvement was observed with surgical treatments, although the advantage needs to be balanced against risk of intervention	C
Consider in women wishing to avoid mesh‐related complications	–