1. Auditing Compliance with Procedures for the Safe and Secure Handling of Medicines Tracey Walker Clinical Manager, 144 Wythenshawe Road, Respite Service Sue Banfield, Pharmacist, Community Services Medicines Optimisation Team Background Results Methods Conclusions References Manchester Learning Disability Partnership ( MLDP) is a partnership between Manchester City Council (MCC) and Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (CMFT). The procedures were launched in May 2013, to support the adherence to CMFT Community Services Medicines Policy, Part C *(2013). The MLDP Procedures for the Safe and Secure handling of medicines support MLDP staff to adhere to – Legal requirements Care Quality Commission (CQC) Standards for Medicines Management NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) Risk Management Standards Professional standards, eg. NMC. An audit of the application of the procedures took place within the Respite Service and Complex Needs Day service, which provide support to adults with learning disabilities and additional complex behavioural needs. Three audits were undertaken to identify whether standards defined within the Procedures were being met in relation to- Annual medication review Disposal of medicines (Respite service only) Recording and reporting of side effects (Respite service only) Standards Standards for each audit were identified based on the MLDP Procedures Sample At the time of the audit, 16 out of 24 people who use the service were identified as having prescribed medication and were eligible for inclusion. Data Collection Data collection sheets were designed to gather information from each persons file Manchester Learning Disability Partnership Procedures for the Safe and Secure Handling of Medicines, version 1 2013, originators, Kenny Jones, Practice Advisor, MLDP, Sue Banfiled, Pharmacist, Ashley Harling,Pharmacist, Community Services Medicines Management Team Annual Medication Review Evidence was found that all people taking medication whilst in the care of the respite service had a medication review, but for 3 of the 16 files audited, the review was not documented as having been held within the last twelve months. However, this cannot be seen as definitive evidence that an annual review had not taken place due to the nature of the respite service Because people live at home and not within the respite setting, the service is not responsible for facilitating this review, therefore it is possible that some reviews had taken place but had not been documented. For the five adults who attend the Complex Needs Day Service but not the respite service, all five had a documented annual medication review. It was identified that the roles and responsibilities of the respite service staff should be agreed in relation to recording annual review and a clear record kept Implications for future data collection, to consider the source of the data Disposal of Medicines The respite service is fully compliant with the standards for returning medicines as defined within MLDP Procedures. Recording and Reporting Side Effects Only one person had a new medicine identified on the MAR chart, a ‘Record of Side Effects’ form was in place for that person and no side effects were noted during their respite stay. Although the side effects audit was for only one person, it indicated that MLDP procedure was being adhered to.