INVITATION

to attend the meeting of the Working Group on Drug-Related problems

on Wednesday 1 February 2017, 11.00-12.00h. Park Hotel, Bled, Slovenia. Room to be
announced. Chair: Tommy Westerlund and/or Nejc Horvat

Program

- Introduction round participants

- Report on Workshop in Hilleroed (see next page of this document)
- First impressions of the new classification
- Validation of the classification V7.0
What needs to be done
What has been done
- Protocol for Preparing valid translations of the classification
- What is next?

Foppe van Mil

PCNE professional secretary
Report
Workshop 2: Revising the DRP-classification, making the Version 7.0
Chairs: Nejc Horvat and Tommy Westerlund, with the support of Foppe van Mil

Aim of the WS
to revise the PCNE DRP Classification V6.2 to create a new Version 7 by collecting comments and
suggestions for improvements of the classification system.

Process
A short introductory session was followed by work in groups with each group focusing on a different
section of the classification (problems, causes, interventions or outcomes). They discussed the
structure and order of the assigned section, as well as missing or superfluous content. Each group
prepared a list of suggestions for improvement of the classification system. They presented their
suggestions together with a short rationale for them at the final plenary. All participants expressed
their agreement or disagreement with the suggested changes using an electronic voting system.

Participants
This workshop was suitable for both novice and
experienced users of the classification. There were
26 participants (excluding facilitators):
Hege Salvesen Blix, Sek Hung Chau, Line Due
Christensen, Siew-Siang Chua, Magaly Dory, Justyna
Dymek, Rik Ensing, Hanne Fischer, Veerle Foulon,
Trine Graabaek, Nina Griese, Carmel Hughes,
Jacqueline Hugtenburg, Ana Janezic, Mitja Kos,
Bojan Madjar, Lola Murillo Fernàndez, Trine Nielsen,
Marina Odalovic, Elisabeth Pfister, Ina Richling, Olaf
Rose, Goedele Strauven, Tomasz Szymanski, Linda
Aagaard Thomsen, Spela Zerovnik

Results
There were 18 suggested changes: 4 in the Problems section, 6 in the Causes, 5 in the Interventions
and 3 in the Outcomes section. They are presented below ordered according to section and percentage
of agreement (from highest to lowest).

Section Problems
Suggestion % disagree % agree
Delete P1.3 Wrong effect of drug treatment (under Treatment 4% 96%
effectiveness)
Delete subdomains in the P2 domain (just 1 instead of 3) 12% 88%
Move subdomain P3.2 Unnecessary drug-treatment (from 16% 74%
Treatment costs) to P1.5 (to Treatment effectiveness)
Delete domain Treatment Costs (move Treatment costs for the 40% 60%
patient to the Causes section, e.g. Patient can't afford
medications)

Section Causes
Suggestion % disagree % agree Comments
 Add No or inappropriate monitoring as 8% 92% - add primary domain
a subdomain (under e.g. C1 Drug Monitoring (subdomains:
selection) no TDM, no specific
monitoring),
- add another subdomain
to the domain C8 Other No
or inappropriate
monitoring
Add Prescribing errors due to technical 8% 92%
issues (e.g. electronic prescribing)
Add Inappropriate drug according to 12% 88%
guidelines as a subdomain
Rename C6 Logistics to Dispensing and 20% 80%
revise the content (use logistics under
dispensing)
Rearrange the domains by categorizing 28% 72%
it: prescribing, dispensing and use
Delete C3.6 (Pharmacokinetic problem 28% 72% - C3.1 (Drug dose too low)
requiring dose adjustment) and C 3.7 and C3.2 (Drug dose too
(Deterioration/improvement of high) instead of it
disease state requiring dose
adjustment)

Section Interventions
Suggestion % disagree % agree Comments
Add a domain 8% 92%
Pharmacist/Pharmaconomist
independent intervention
Change the order of the Interventions 8% 92% - some other rationale to
domain make it more consistent
Sections and domains must be the 22% 78%
same all settings/countries.
Subdomains are flexible and can be
changed.
Delete the intervention subdomains 33% 67% - they belong to the
I1.3 (Intervention proposed, approved Outcomes section
by Prescriber), I1.4 (Intervention (suggestion there)
proposed, not approved by Prescriber)
and I1.5 (Intervention proposed,
outcome unknown)
One intervention per problem 70% 30%
Section Outcomes
Suggestion % disagree % agree Comments
It should be possible to register 4% 96% - add another section
whether an intervention is Implementation of
implemented or not. intervention
- the classification system
should be able to register,
why an intervention was
not implemented => need
for subdomains in the
Implementation section,
e.g. not feasible, the patient
does not accept it, the
system can't support it
Outcome of the intervention should be 4% 96%
renamed to "Status of the DRP" or
"Result of CMR".
Need for subdomains in 22% 78%
Implementation of intervention
section.