Prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people in primary care and its association with hospital admission: longitudinal study

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether hospital admission is associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing among older primary care patients (aged ≥65 years) and whether such prescribing was more likely after hospital admission than before.

DESIGN

Longitudinal study of retrospectively extracted data from general practice records.

SETTING

44 general practices in Ireland in 2012-15.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 65 years or over attending participating practices.

EXPOSURE

Admission to hospital (any hospital admission versus none, and post-admission versus pre-admission).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing assessed using 45 criteria from the Screening Tool for Older Persons' Prescription (STOPP) version 2, analysed both as rate of distinct potentially inappropriate prescribing criteria met (stratified Cox regression) and binary presence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (logistic regression) and adjusted for patients' characteristics. A sensitivity analysis used matching with propensity scores based on patients' characteristics and diagnoses.

RESULTS

Overall 38 229 patients were included, and during 2012 the mean age was 76.8 (SD 8.2) years and 43% (13 212) were male. Each year, 10.4-15.0% (3015/29 077 in 2015 to 4537/30 231 in 2014) of patients had at least one hospital admission. The overall prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing ranged from 45.3% (13 940/30 789) of patients in 2012 to 51.0% (14 823/29 077) in 2015. Independently of age, sex, number of prescription items, comorbidity, and health cover, hospital admission was associated with a higher rate of distinct potentially inappropriate prescribing criteria met; the adjusted hazard ratio for hospital admission was 1.24 (95% confidence interval 1.20 to 1.28). Among participants who were admitted to hospital, the likelihood of potentially inappropriate prescribing after admission was higher than before admission, independent of patients' characteristics; the adjusted odds ratio for after hospital admission was 1.72 (1.63 to 1.84). Analysis of propensity score matched pairs showed a slight reduction in the hazard ratio for hospital admission to 1.22 (1.18 to 1.25).

CONCLUSION

Hospital admission was independently associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing. It is important to determine how hospital admission may affect appropriateness of prescribing for older people and how potential adverse consequences of admission can be minimised.

Self-report versus electronic medical record recorded healthcare utilisation in older community-dwelling adults: Comparison of two prospective cohort studies

INTRODUCTION

Self-reported measures of healthcare utilisation are often used in longitudinal cohort studies involving older community-dwelling people. The aim of this study is to compare healthcare utilisation rates using patient self-report and manual extraction from the general practice (GP) electronic medical record (EMR).

METHODS

Study population: Two prospective cohort studies (n = 806 and n = 1,377, aged ≥70 years) conducted in the Republic of Ireland were compared. Study outcomes: GP, outpatient department (OPD) and emergency department (ED) visits over a one-year period. Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics of the two cohorts are presented. A negative binomial regression was performed and results are presented as incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For the outcome of any ED visit, linear regression was performed, yielding risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI.

RESULTS

The annual rates of GP, OPD and ED visits were 6.30 (SD 4.63), 2.11 (SD 2.46) and 0.26 (SD 0.62) respectively in GP EMR cohort, compared to 5.65 (SD 8.06), 2.09 (SD 5.83) and 0.32 (SD 0.84) in the self-report cohort. In univariate regression analysis comparing healthcare utilisation, the self-report cohort reported a lower frequency of GP visits (unadjusted IRR 0.90 (95% CI 0.84, 0.96), p = 0.02)), a greater frequency of ED visits (1.20 (0.98, 1.49), p = 0.083)), and no difference in OPD visits (unadjusted IRR 0.99 (95% CI 0.86, 1.13), p = 0.845)). In multivariate analysis, adjusted for relevant confounders, there was no difference in GP visits (adjusted IRR 0.99 (95% CI 0.92, 1.06), p = 0.684)) or OPD visits (adjusted IRR 1.09 (0.95, 1.25), p = 0.23)) between the two cohorts. However, the self-report cohort reported 37% more ED visits (adjusted IRR 1.37 (1.10, 1.71), p = 0.005)) and were more likely to report any ED visit (adjusted RR 1.23 (95% CI 1.02, 1.48), p = 0.028)).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that reported rates of GP and OPD visits were similar but there were differences in reported ED visits, with significantly higher self-reported visits. This may be due to ED visits not being notified to the GP and contextual issues such as transfer of healthcare utilisation data between sectors may vary in different healthcare systems.

α-Blockers for uncomplicated ureteric stones: a clinical practice guideline

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence-based recommendation concerning the use of α-blockers for uncomplicated ureteric stones based on an up-to-date Cochrane review, as the role of medical expulsive therapy for uncomplicated ureteric stones remains controversial in the light of new contradictory trial evidence.

METHODS

We applied the Rapid Recommendations approach to guideline development, which represents an innovative approach by an international collaborative network of clinicians, researchers, methodologists and patient representatives seeking to rapidly respond to new, potentially practice-changing evidence with recommendations developed according to standards for trustworthy guidelines.

RESULTS

The panel suggests the use of α-blockers in addition to standard care over standard care alone in patients with uncomplicated ureteric stones (weak recommendation based on low-quality evidence). The panel judged that the net benefit of α-blockers was small and that there was considerable uncertainty about patients' values and preferences. This means that the panel expects that most patients would choose treatment with α-blockers but that a substantial proportion would not. This recommendation applies to both patients in whom the presence of ureteric stones is confirmed by imaging, as well as patients in whom the diagnosis is made based on clinical grounds only.

CONCLUSION

The Rapid Recommendations panel suggests the use of α-blockers for patients with ureteric stones. Shared decision-making is emphasised in making the final choice between the treatment options.

Supporting prescribing in Irish primary care: protocol for a non-randomised pilot study of a general practice pharmacist (GPP) intervention to optimise prescribing in primary care

Background

Prescribing for patients taking multiple medicines (i.e. polypharmacy) is challenging for general practitioners (GPs). Limited evidence suggests that the integration of pharmacists into the general practice team could improve the management of these patients. The aim of this study is to develop and test an intervention involving pharmacists, working within GP practices, to optimise prescribing in Ireland, which has a mixed public and private primary healthcare system.

Methods

This non-randomised pilot study will use a mixed-methods approach. Four general practices will be purposively sampled and recruited. A pharmacist will join the practice team for 6 months. They will participate in the management of repeat prescribing and undertake medication reviews (which will address high-risk prescribing and potentially inappropriate prescribing, deprescribing and cost-effective and generic prescribing) with adult patients. Pharmacists will also provide prescribing advice regarding the use of preferred drugs, undertake clinical audits, join practice team meetings and facilitate practice-based education. Throughout the 6-month intervention period, anonymised practice-level medication (e.g. medication changes) and cost data will be collected. A nested Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) study will be undertaken during months 4 and 5 of the 6-month intervention period to explore the impact of the intervention in older adults (aged ≥ 65 years). For this, a sub-set of 50 patients aged ≥ 65 years with significant polypharmacy (≥ 10 repeat medicines) will be recruited from each practice and invited to a medication review with the pharmacist. PROMs and healthcare utilisation data will be collected using patient questionnaires, and a 6-week follow-up review conducted. Acceptability of the intervention will be explored using pre- and post-intervention semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders. Quantitative and qualitative data analysis will be undertaken and an economic evaluation conducted.

Discussion

This non-randomised pilot study will provide evidence regarding the feasibility and potential effectiveness of general practice-based pharmacists in Ireland and provide data on whether a randomised controlled trial of this intervention is indicated. It will also provide a deeper understanding as to how a pharmacist working as part of the general practice team will affect organisational processes and professional relationships in a mixed public and private primary healthcare system.

Examining the association of body mass index and the depth of epidural space, radiation dose exposure and fluoroscopic screening time during transforaminal nerve block injection: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to examine the association between body mass index (BMI) and the depth of tissue overlying the epidural space. Secondary objectives examined the association between BMI and (1) radiation dose exposure and (2) fluoroscopic screening time during transforaminal nerve block (TFNB) injections.

METHODOLOGY

This is a retrospective cohort study including patients aged ≥ 16 years who underwent unilateral single-level TFNB in a single centre over a 28-month period, by a single spinal orthopaedic surgeon. Demographic data, BMI (kg/m²), fluoroscopic screening time (seconds) and radiation dose exposure (centi-gray per square centimetre squared (cGy-cm²)) were recorded. Exposure of interest: BMI.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

depth of epidural space.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

(1) radiation dose exposure, (2) fluoroscopic screening time. Descriptive statistics for study participants' demographics are presented. Spearman's rank (r) coefficient and linear regression analysis was performed examining the association between BMI and the outcome measures.

RESULTS

A total of 362 patients met inclusion criteria; n = 45 patients were excluded due to incomplete data, final analysis included 317 patients. Mean age was 62.6 years (IQR 53-74). Male:female ratio was 37.9% (n = 120):62.1%(n = 197). Mean BMI was 26.9 kg/m² (IQR 24.4-28.9 kg/m²). Following adjustment for age, gender and spinal comorbidities there is a statistically significant association between BMI and the depth of tissue overlying the epidural space (adjusted coefficient 2.41, (95% CI (2.14, 2.68), p < 0.001)). We also found a significant association between BMI and both secondary outcomes, radiation dose exposure (adjusted coefficient 1.45, (95% CI (0.84, 2.06), p < 0.001)) and fluoroscopic screening time (adjusted coefficient 0.11, (95% CI (0.02, 0.20), p = 0.02)).

CONCLUSION

This study has demonstrated a significant association between increasing BMI and increased depth of the epidural space. Furthermore, significant associations between increasing BMI, radiation dose exposure and fluoroscopy screening time have been identified. BMI may represent a modifiable risk factor with a view to decreasing patient exposure to medical ionised radiation.

A Core Outcome Set for Multimorbidity Research (COSmm)

PURPOSE

We aimed to develop a consensus-based set of core outcomes specifically for studies in multimorbidity.

METHODS

We undertook a consensus study following the COS-STAR (Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting) guidelines for the design and reporting of core outcome sets. A Delphi panel of experts completed a web-based survey with 2 rounds. Panelists were presented with a range of outcomes that had been identified in previous workshops and a related systematic review. They indicated their level of agreement on whether each outcome should be included in the core set using a 5-point Likert scale, and outcomes reaching a prespecified consensus level were included.

RESULTS

Of 30 individuals invited to be panelists, 26 from 13 countries agreed. All 26 completed both rounds of the survey. The Delphi panel reached consensus on 17 outcomes for inclusion in a core outcome set for multimorbidity (COSmm). The highest-ranked outcomes were health-related quality of life, mental health outcomes, and mortality. Other outcomes were grouped into overarching themes of patient-reported impacts and behaviors (treatment burden, self-rated health, self-management behavior, self-efficacy, adherence); physical activity and function (activities of daily living, physical function, physical activity); consultation related (communication, shared decision making, prioritization); and health systems (health care use, costs, quality of health care).

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus study involved a wide range of international experts who identified a large number of outcomes for multimorbidity intervention studies. Our results suggest that quality of life, mental health outcomes, and mortality should be regarded as essential core outcomes. Researchers should, however, also consider the full range of outcomes when designing studies to capture important domains in multimorbidity depending on individual study aims and interventions.

Measuring medication adherence in older community-dwelling patients with multimorbidity

PURPOSE

Older people with several chronic conditions require multiple drugs from different classes to be adequately treated. This study aims to: (i) measure medication adherence across multiple conditions and therapeutic drug groups in older community-dwelling patients, and (ii) examine the effect of multimorbidity on adherence.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of medication adherence in 855 community-dwelling patients aged ≥ 70 years from 15 practices in Ireland using the Health Service Executive Primary Care Reimbursement Service (HSE-PCRS) pharmacy claims database. Multimorbidity was measured using the RxRisk-V and by the number of different drug classes. The RxRisk-V algorithm classifies prescription drug fills into 45 chronic disease classes for older populations based on the WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system. Adherence to medications was assessed by: (i) calculating the average medication possession ratio (MPR) per patient and (ii) an MPR< 80%.

RESULTS

The overall median MPR for the cohort was 0.83 (IQR 0.69, 0.91). The conditions with the highest MPRs were hypothyroidism (mean MPR = 0.88, SD = 0.20) and type 2 diabetes (mean MPR = 0.83, SD = 0.19), followed by heart disease. On average, 20-40% of patients were non-adherent (MPR < 80%) across all conditions. There was an inverted U-shaped relationship between the mean MPR and number of morbidities and drug classes. Adherence varied per patients' morbidity burden, with higher adherence for certain combinations of chronic conditions.

CONCLUSION

In total, 31% of older patients with multimorbidity were non-adherent to their medication but adherence levels varied across treatment categories and chronic conditions.

Validation of the CHADS2 clinical prediction rule to predict ischaemic stroke

The CHADS2 predicts annual risk of ischaemic stroke in non-valvular atrial fibrillation. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the predictive value of CHADS2. The literature was systematically searched from 2001 to October 2010. Data was pooled and analysed using discrimination and calibration statistical measures, using a random effects model. Eight data sets (n=2815) were included. The diagnostic accuracy suggested a cut-point of ≥1 has higher sensitivity (92%) than specificity (12%) and a cut-point of ≥4 has higher specificity (96%) than sensitivity (33%). Lower summary estimates were observed for cut-points ≥2 (sensitivity 79%, specificity 42%) and ≥3 (specificity 77%, sensitivity 50%). There was insufficient data to analyse cut-points ≥5 or ≥6. Moderate pooled c statistic values were identified for the classic (0.63, 95% CI 0.52–0.75) and revised (0.60, 95% CI 0.43–0.72) view of stratification of the CHADS2 . Calibration analysis in-dicated no significant difference between the predicted and observed strokes across the three risk strata for the classic or revised view. All results were associated with high heterogeneity, and conclusions should be made cautiously. In conclusion, the pooled c statistic and calibration analysis suggests minimal clinical utility of both the classic and revised view of the CHADS2 in predicting ischaemic stroke across all risk strata. Due to high heterogeneity across studies and low event rates across all risk strata, the results should be interpreted cautiously. Further validation of CHADS2 should perhaps be undertaken, given the methodological differences between many of the available validation studies and the original CHADS2 derivation study.

Supporting prescribing in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in primary care (SPPiRE): a cluster randomised controlled trial protocol and pilot

Background

Multimorbidity, defined as the presence of at least two chronic conditions, becomes increasingly common in older people and is associated with poorer health outcomes and significant polypharmacy. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) recently published a multimorbidity guideline that advises providing an individualised medication review for all people prescribed 15 or more repeat medicines. This study incorporates this guideline and aims to assess the effectiveness of a complex intervention designed to support general practitioners (GPs) to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing and consider deprescribing in older people with multimorbidity and significant polypharmacy in Irish primary care.

Methods

This study is a cluster randomised controlled trial, involving 30 general practices and 450 patients throughout Ireland. Practices will be eligible to participate if they have at least 300 patients aged 65 years and over on their patient panel and if they use either one of the two predominant practice management software systems in use in Ireland. Using a software patient finder tool, practices will identify and recruit patients aged 65 years and over, who are prescribed at least 15 repeat medicines. Once baseline data collection is complete, practices will be randomised using minimisation by an independent third party to either intervention or control. Given the nature of the intervention, it is not possible to blind participants or study personnel. GPs in intervention practices will receive login details to a website where they will access training videos and a template for conducting an individualised structured medication review, which they will undertake with each of their included patients. Control practices will deliver usual care over the 6-month study period. Primary outcome measures pertain to the individual patient level and are the proportion of patients with any PIP and the number of repeat medicines.

Discussion

Disease-specific approaches in multimorbidity may be inappropriate and result in fragmented and poorly co-ordinated care. This pragmatic study is evaluating a complex intervention that is relevant across multiple conditions and addresses potential concerns around medicines safety in this vulnerable group of patients. The potential for system-wide implementation will be explored with a parallel mixed methods process evaluation.

Trial registration

ISRCTN: 12752680, Registered 20 October 2016.

Why do authors derive new cardiovascular clinical prediction rules in the presence of existing rules? A mixed methods study

Background

Researchers should examine existing evidence to determine the need for a new study. It is unknown whether developers evaluate existing evidence to justify new cardiovascular clinical prediction rules (CPRs).

Objective

We aimed to assess whether authors of cardiovascular CPRs cited existing CPRs, why some authors did not cite existing CPRs, and why they thought existing CPRs were insufficient.

Method

Derivation studies of cardiovascular CPRs from the International Register of Clinical Prediction Rules for Primary Care were evaluated. We reviewed the introduction sections to determine whether existing CPRs were cited. Using thematic content analysis, the stated reasons for determining existing cardiovascular CPRs insufficient were explored. Study authors were surveyed via e-mail and post. We asked whether they were aware of any existing cardiovascular CPRs at the time of derivation, how they searched for existing CPRs, and whether they thought it was important to cite existing CPRs.

Results

Of 85 derivation studies included, 48 (56.5%) cited existing CPRs, 33 (38.8%) did not cite any CPR, and four (4.7%) declared there was none to cite. Content analysis identified five categories of existing CPRs insufficiency related to: (1) derivation (5 studies; 11.4% of 44), (2) construct (31 studies; 70.5%), (3) performance (10 studies; 22.7%), (4) transferability (13 studies; 29.5%), and (5) evidence (8 studies; 18.2%). Authors of 54 derivation studies (71.1% of 76 authors contacted) responded to the survey. Twenty-five authors (46.3%) reported they were aware of existing CPR at the time of derivation. Twenty-nine authors (53.7%) declared they conducted a systematic search to identify existing CPRs. Most authors (90.7%) indicated citing existing CPRs was important.

Conclusion

Cardiovascular CPRs are often developed without citing existing CPRs although most authors agree it is important. Common justifications for new CPRs concerned construct, including choice of predictor variables or relevance of outcomes. Developers should clearly justify why new CPRs are needed with reference to existing CPRs to avoid unnecessary duplication.

External validation of the Vulnerable Elder's Survey for predicting mortality and emergency admission in older community-dwelling people: a prospective cohort study

Background

Prospective external validation of the Vulnerable Elder’s Survey (VES-13) in primary care remains limited. The aim of this study is to externally validate the VES-13 in predicting mortality and emergency admission in older community-dwelling adults.

Methods

Design: Prospective cohort study with 2 years follow-up (2010–2012). Setting: 15 General Practices (GPs) in the Republic of Ireland. Participants: n = 862, aged ≥70 years, community-dwellers Exposure: VES-13 calculated at baseline, where a score of ≥3 denoted high risk. Outcomes: i) Mortality; ii) ≥1 Emergency admission and ≥1 ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) admission over 2 years. Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics, model discrimination (c-statistic) and sensitivity/specificity.

Results

Of 862 study participants, a total of 246 (38%) were classified as vulnerable at baseline. Fifty-three (6%) died during follow-up and 246 (29%) had an emergency admission. At the VES-13 cut-point of ≥3 denoting high-risk model discrimination was poor for mortality (c-statistic: 0.61 (95% CI 0.54, 0.67), ≥1 emergency admission (c-statistic: 0.59 (95% CI 0.56, 0.63) and ≥1 ACS emergency admission (c-statistic: 0.63 (95% CI 0.60, 0.67).

Conclusions

In this study the VES-13 demonstrated relatively limited predictive accuracy in predicting mortality and emergency admission. External validation studies examining the tool in different health settings and healthier populations are needed and represent an interesting area for future research.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-017-0460-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Adverse outcomes in older adults attending emergency departments: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Identification of Seniors At Risk (ISAR) screening tool

Background

older adults are frequent users of emergency services and demonstrate high rates of adverse outcomes following emergency care.

Objective

to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Identification of Seniors At Risk (ISAR) screening tool, to determine its predictive value in identifying adults ≥65 years at risk of functional decline, unplanned emergency department (ED) readmission, emergency hospitalisation or death within 180 days after index ED visit/hospitalisation.

Methods

a systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, EBSCO and the Cochrane Library to identify validation and impact analysis studies of the ISAR tool. A pre-specified ISAR score of ≥2 (maximum score 6 points) was used to identify patients at high risk of adverse outcomes. A bivariate random effects model generated pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. Statistical heterogeneity was explored and methodological quality was assessed using validated criteria.

Results

thirty-two validation studies (n = 12,939) are included. At ≥2, the pooled sensitivity of the ISAR for predicting ED return, emergency hospitalisation and mortality at 6 months is 0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.87), 0.82 (95% CI 0.74-0.88) and 0.87 (95% CI 0.75-0.94), respectively, with a pooled specificity of 0.31 (95% CI 0.24-0.38), 0.32 (95% CI 0.24-0.41) and 0.35 (95% CI 0.26-0.44). Similar values are demonstrated at 30 and 90 days. Three heterogeneous impact analysis studies examined the clinical implementation of the ISAR and reported mixed findings across patient and process outcomes.

Conclusion

the ISAR has modest predictive accuracy and may serve as a decision-making adjunct when determining which older adults can be safely discharged.

Persistent modifications of hippocampal synaptic function during remote spatial memory

A widely accepted notion for a process underlying memory formation is that learning changes the efficacy of synapses by the mechanism of synaptic plasticity. While there is compelling evidence of changes in synaptic efficacy observed after learning, demonstration of persistent synaptic changes accompanying memory has been elusive. We report that acquisition of a hippocampus and long-term potentiation dependent place memory persistently changes the function of CA1 synapses. Using extracellular recordings we measured CA3-CA1 and EC-CA1 synaptic responses and found robust changes in the CA3-CA1 pathway after memory training. Crucially, these changes in synaptic function lasted at least a month and coincided with the persistence of long-term place memories; the changes were only observed in animals that expressed robust memory, and not in animals with poor memory recall. Interestingly, our findings were observed at the level of populations of synapses; suggesting that memory formation recruits widespread synaptic circuits and persistently reorganizes their function to store information.

External validation of the Probability of repeated admission (Pra) risk prediction tool in older community-dwelling people attending general practice: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Emergency admission is associated with the potential for adverse events in older people and risk prediction models are available to identify those at highest risk of admission. The aim of this study was to externally validate and compare the performance of the Probability of repeated admission (Pra) risk model and a modified version (incorporating a multimorbidity measure) in predicting emergency admission in older community-dwelling people.

SETTING

15 general practices (GPs) in the Republic of Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

n=862, ≥70 years, community-dwelling people prospectively followed up for 2 years (2010-2012).

EXPOSURE

Pra risk model (original and modified) calculated for baseline year where ≥0.5 denoted high risk (patient questionnaire, GP medical record review) of future emergency admission.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Emergency admission over 1 year (GP medical record review).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

descriptive statistics, model discrimination (c-statistic) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic).

RESULTS

Of 862 patients, a total of 154 (18%) had ≥1 emergency admission(s) in the follow-up year. 63 patients (7%) were classified as high risk by the original Pra and of these 26 (41%) were admitted. The modified Pra classified 391 (45%) patients as high risk and 103 (26%) were subsequently admitted. Both models demonstrated only poor discrimination (original Pra: c-statistic 0.65 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.70); modified Pra: c-statistic 0.67 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.72)). When categorised according to risk-category model, specificity was highest for the original Pra at cut-point of ≥0.5 denoting high risk (95%), and for the modified Pra at cut-point of ≥0.7 (95%). Both models overestimated the number of admissions across all risk strata.

CONCLUSIONS

While the original Pra model demonstrated poor discrimination, model specificity was high and a small number of patients identified as high risk. Future validation studies should examine higher cut-points denoting high risk for the modified Pra, which has practical advantages in terms of application in GP. The original Pra tool may have a role in identifying higher-risk community-dwelling older people for inclusion in future trials aiming to reduce emergency admissions.

Comparison of count-based multimorbidity measures in predicting emergency admission and functional decline in older community-dwelling adults: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Multimorbidity, defined as the presence of 2 or more chronic medical conditions in an individual, is associated with poorer health outcomes. Several multimorbidity measures exist, and the challenge is to decide which to use preferentially in predicting health outcomes. The study objective was to compare the performance of 5 count-based multimorbidity measures in predicting emergency hospital admission and functional decline in older community-dwelling adults attending primary care.

SETTING

15 general practices (GPs) in Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

n=862, ≥70 years, community-dwellers followed-up for 2 years (2010-2012). Exposure at baseline: Five multimorbidity measures (disease counts, selected conditions counts, Charlson comorbidity index, RxRisk-V, medication counts) calculated using GP medical record and linked national pharmacy claims data.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

(1) Emergency admission and ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) admission (GP medical record) and (2) functional decline (postal questionnaire).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Descriptive statistics and measure discrimination (c-statistic, 95% CIs), adjusted for confounders.

RESULTS

Median age was 77 years and 53% were women. Prevalent rates ranged from 37% to 91% depending on which measure was used to define multimorbidity. All measures demonstrated poor discrimination for the outcome of emergency admission (c-statistic range: 0.62, 0.65), ACS admission (c-statistic range: 0.63, 0.68) and functional decline (c-statistic range: 0.55, 0.61). Medication-based measures were equivalent to diagnosis-based measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of measure may have a significant impact on prevalent rates. Five multimorbidity measures demonstrated poor discrimination in predicting emergency admission and functional decline, with medication-based measures equivalent to diagnosis-based measures. Consideration of multimorbidity in isolation is insufficient for predicting these outcomes in community settings.

Training doctors to manage patients with multimorbidity: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients with multimorbidity (two or more chronic conditions) are now the norm in clinical practice, and place an increasing burden on the healthcare system. Management of these patients is challenging, and requires doctors who are skilled in the complexity of multiple chronic diseases.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of the literature to ascertain whether there are education and training formats which have been used to train postgraduate medical doctors in the management of patients with multimorbidity in primary and/or secondary care, and which have been shown to improve knowledge, skills, attitudes, and/or patient outcomes.

METHODS

Overall, 75,110 citations were screened, of which 65 full-text articles were then independently assessed for eligibility by two reviewers, and two studies met the inclusion criteria for the review.

RESULTS

The two included studies implemented and evaluated multimorbidity workshops, and highlight the need for further research addressing the learning needs of doctors tasked with managing patients with multimorbidity in their daily practice.

CONCLUSION

While much has been published about the challenges presented to medical staff by patients with multimorbidity, published research regarding education of doctors to manage these problems is lacking. Further research is required to determine whether there is a need for, or benefit from, specific training for doctors to manage patients with multimorbidity. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013004010.

Impact of Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing on Adverse Drug Events, Health Related Quality of Life and Emergency Hospital Attendance in Older People Attending General Practice: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background:

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) describes medications where risk generally outweighs benefit for older people. Cross-sectional studies suggest an association between PIP and poorer health outcomes but there is a paucity of prospective cohort studies. This study investigates the longitudinal association of PIP with adverse drug events (ADEs), health related quality of life, and accident & emergency visits.

Methods:

Study design: Two-year (2010–2012) prospective cohort study (n = 904, ≥70 years, community-dwelling) with linked pharmacy dispensing data. Exposure: Baseline PIP: Screening Tool for Older Persons potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) and Beers 2012 applied 12 months prior. Study outcomes: ADEs (patient interview), health related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L: patient questionnaire), and accident & emergency visits (general practice medical record review). Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics: Poisson (incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval [CI]], linear regression models [regression coefficient [95% CI]], and logistic [odds ratio [OR] [95% CI]).

Results:

Of 791 participants eligible for follow-up, 673 (85%) returned a questionnaire and 605 (77%) also completed an ADE interview. Baseline STOPP PIP prevalence was 40% and 445 (74%) patients reported ≥1 ADE at follow-up. In multivariable analysis, ≥2 STOPP PIP was associated with ADEs (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.29 [95% CI 1.03, 1.85; p = .03]; poorer health related quality of life [adjusted regression coefficient: −0.11 [95% CI −0.16, −0.06; p < .001]]; and, ≥1 accident & emergency visit [adjusted OR: 1.85 [95% CI 1.06, 3.24; p = .03]]). Baseline Beers 2012 prevalence was 26% and there was no association with adverse health outcomes in multivariable analysis.

Conclusions:

Older community-dwelling people, prescribed ≥2 STOPP PIP are more likely to report ADEs, poorer health related quality of life and attend the accident & emergency department over 2-year follow-up.