Effects of Hospital-Based Comprehensive Medication Reviews Including Postdischarge Follow-up on Older Patients' Use of Health Care: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Clinical impact of medication review and deprescribing in older inpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is a primary risk factor for the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and ultimately, adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Medication review and deprescribing represent effective strategies to simplify therapeutic regimens, minimize risks, and reduce PIM prescriptions. This systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental and observational studies aimed to evaluate the impact of different medication review and deprescribing interventions in hospitalized older patients.

METHODS

Experimental and observational prospective cohort studies evaluating the clinical effects of medication review and deprescribing strategies in older hospitalized patients were searched in the bibliographic databases, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, from inception until January 8, 2024. A narrative synthesis of the results was provided, along with a meta-analysis of dichotomous data (i.e., re-hospitalizations and mortality).

RESULTS

Overall, 21 randomized controlled trials, 7 non-randomized interventional studies, and 2 prospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 14 (46.7%) assessed medication appropriateness as the primary outcome, while the remaining evaluated clinical outcomes (e.g., length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and incidence of ADRs) and/or quality of life. The meta-analysis revealed a slight but statistically significant 8% reduction in hospital readmissions (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85-0.99) following medication review and deprescribing, but no significant impact on mortality (HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Of the 30 included studies, 21 were considered at high risk of bias, mostly due to potential deviations from intended interventions and randomization processes. The remaining nine studies had "some concerns" (eight studies) or were considered at "low" risk of bias (one study).

CONCLUSION

Medication review and deprescribing are associated with potential benefits in reducing hospital readmission rates among hospitalized older patients, particularly through the reduction of PIM prescriptions. The integration of thorough medication review and deprescribing protocols in hospital settings may improve post-discharge outcomes and reduce overall healthcare costs.

The Impact of Pharmacist Medication Reviews on Geriatric Patients: A Scoping Review

Medication review is an intervention with the potential to reduce drug-related problems (DRPs) in the elderly. This study aimed to determine the effect of pharmacists' medication reviews on geriatric patients. This study accessed two online databases, MEDLINE Complete and Scopus, and examined all studies published in English between 2019 and 2023, except for reviews. The studies included (1) participants over 65 years of age and (2) medication reviews conducted by pharmacists. The titles, abstracts, and full texts were reviewed for data extraction to determine whether the studies satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Forty-four of the initial 709 articles were included in this study. The articles included discussions on the incidence rates of DRPs and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) (n=21), hospitalization (n=14), medication adherence (n=9), quality of life (QoL) (n=8), and falls (n=7). Pharmacist medication reviews were associated with a reduced incidence of DRPs and PIMs, and improved adherence to medications. Patients' overall QoL is also increasing. However, pharmacist medication reviews were not strongly associated with decreased hospitalization or falls. A pharmacist's medication review may be a feasible intervention for reducing the incidence rates of DRPs and PIMs, regardless of whether it is performed as a sole intervention or supplemented with other interventions. The intervention was also effective in increasing medication adherence and QoL.

Effectiveness of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation on medication errors at hospital discharge and healthcare utilization in the next 30 days: a pragmatic clinical trial

Transitions of care often lead to medication errors and unnecessary healthcare utilization. Medication reconciliation has been repeatedly shown to reduce this risk. However, the great majority of evidence is limited to the provision of medication reconciliation within clinical trials and countries with well-established clinical pharmacy. Thus, this pragmatic, prospective, controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of routine pharmacist-led medication reconciliation compared to standard care on medication errors and unplanned healthcare utilization in adult general medical patients hospitalized in a teaching hospital in Slovenia. All patients hospitalized in a ward where medication reconciliation was integrated into routine clinical practice were included in the intervention group and received admission and discharge medication reconciliation, coupled with patient counselling. The control group consisted of randomly selected patients from the remaining medical wards. The primary study outcome was unplanned healthcare utilization within 30 days of discharge, and the secondary outcomes were clinically important medication errors at hospital discharge and serious unplanned healthcare utilization within 30 days of discharge. Overall, 414 patients (53.4% male, median 71 years) were included-225 in the intervention group and 189 in the control group. In the intervention group, the number of patients with clinically important medication errors at discharge was significantly lower (intervention vs control group: 9.3% vs 61.9%). Multiple logistic regression revealed that medication reconciliation reduced the likelihood of a clinically important medication error by 20-fold, while a higher number of medications on admission was associated with an increased likelihood. However, no significant differences were noted in any and serious unplanned healthcare utilization (intervention vs control group: 33.9% vs 27.8% and 20.3% vs 14.6%, respectively). The likelihood of serious healthcare utilization increased with the age of the patient, the number of medications on admission and being hospitalized for an acute medical condition. Our pragmatic trial confirmed that medication reconciliation, even when performed as part of routine clinical practice, led to a substantial reduction in the risk of clinically important medication errors at hospital discharge but not to a reduction in healthcare utilization. Medication reconciliation is a fundamental, albeit not sufficient, element to ensure patient safety after hospital discharge. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/search?id=NCT06207500, identifier NCT06207500.

A Trial-Based Cost-Utility Analysis of a Medication Optimization Intervention Versus Standard Care in Older Adults

BACKGROUND

Older adults are at greater risk of medication-related harm than younger adults. The Integrated Medication Management model is an interdisciplinary method aiming to optimize medication therapy and improve patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the cost effectiveness of a medication optimization intervention compared to standard care in acutely hospitalized older adults.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis including 285 adults aged ≥ 70 years was carried out alongside the IMMENSE study. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were derived using the EuroQol 5-Dimension 3-Level Health State Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L). Patient-level data for healthcare use and costs were obtained from administrative registers, taking a healthcare perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated for a 12-month follow-up and compared to a societal willingness-to-pay range of €/QALY 27,067-81,200 (NOK 275,000-825,000). Because of a capacity issue in a primary care resulting in extended hospital stays, a subgroup analysis was carried out for non-long and long stayers with hospitalizations < 14 days or ≥ 14 days.

RESULTS

Mean QALYs were 0.023 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.022-0.025] higher and mean healthcare costs were €4429 [95% CI - 1101 to 11,926] higher for the intervention group in a full population analysis. This produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €192,565/QALY. For the subgroup analysis, mean QALYs were 0.067 [95% CI 0.066-0.070, n = 222] and - 0.101 [95% CI - 0.035 to 0.048, n = 63] for the intervention group in the non-long stayers and long stayers, respectively. Corresponding mean costs were €- 824 [95% CI - 3869 to 2066] and €1992 [95% CI - 17,964 to 18,811], respectively. The intervention dominated standard care for the non-long stayers with a probability of cost effectiveness of 93.1-99.2% for the whole willingness-to-pay range and 67.8% at a zero willingness to pay. Hospitalizations were the main cost driver, and readmissions contributed the most to the cost difference between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

According to societal willingness-to-pay thresholds, the medication optimization intervention was not cost effective compared to standard care for the full population. The intervention dominated standard care for the non-long stayers, with a high probability of cost effectiveness.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The IMMENSE trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on 28 June, 2016 before enrolment started (NCT02816086).

Drug-related readmissions in older hospitalized adults: External validation and updating of OPERAM DRA prediction tool

BACKGROUND

Drug-related readmissions (DRAs) are defined as rehospitalizations with an adverse drug event as their main or significant contributory cause. DRAs represent a major adverse health burden for older patients. A prediction model which identified older hospitalized patients at high risk of a DRA <1 year was previously developed using the OPERAM trial cohort, a European cluster randomized controlled trial including older hospitalized patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. This study has performed external validation and updated the prediction model consequently.

METHODS

The MedBridge trial cohort (a multicenter cluster randomized crossover trial performed in Sweden) was used as a validation cohort. It consisted of 2516 hospitalized patients aged ≥65 years. Model performance was assessed by: (1) discriminative power, assessed by the C-statistic with a 95% confidence interval (CI); (2) calibration, assessed by visual examination of the calibration plot and use of the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test; and (3) overall accuracy, assessed by the scaled Brier score. Several updating methods were carried out to improve model performance.

RESULTS

In total, 2516 older patients were included in the validation cohort, of whom 582 (23.1%) experienced a DRA <1 year. In the validation cohort, the original model showed a good overall accuracy (scaled Brier score 0.03), but discrimination was moderate (C-statistic 0.62 [95% CI 0.59-0.64]), and calibration showed underestimation of risks. In the final updated model, the predictor "cirrhosis with portal hypertension" was removed and "polypharmacy" was added. This improved the model's discriminative capability to a C-statistic of 0.64 (95% CI 0.59-0.70) and enhanced calibration plots. Overall accuracy remained good.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated OPERAM DRA prediction model may be a useful tool in clinical practice to estimate the risk of DRAs in older hospitalized patients subsequent to discharge. Our efforts lay the groundwork for the future development of models with even better performance.

Identifying older adults at increased risk of medication-related readmission to hospital within 30 days of discharge: development and validation of a risk assessment tool

OBJECTIVE

Developing and validating a risk assessment tool aiming to identify older adults (≥65 years) at increased risk of possibly medication-related readmission to hospital within 30 days of discharge.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

The risk score was developed using data from a hospital in southern Sweden and validated using data from four hospitals in the mid-eastern part of Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

The development cohort (n=720) was admitted to hospital during 2017, whereas the validation cohort (n=892) was admitted during 2017-2018.

MEASURES

The risk assessment tool aims to predict possibly medication-related readmission to hospital within 30 days of discharge. Variables known at first admission and individually associated with possibly medication-related readmission were used in development. The included variables were assigned points, and Youden's index was used to decide a threshold score. The risk score was calculated for all individuals in both cohorts. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (c-index) was used to measure the discrimination of the developed risk score. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were calculated using cross-tabulation.

RESULTS

The developed risk assessment tool, the Hospitalisations, Own home, Medications, and Emergency admission (HOME) Score, had a c-index of 0.69 in the development cohort and 0.65 in the validation cohort. It showed sensitivity 76%, specificity 54%, positive predictive value 29% and negative predictive value 90% at the threshold score in the development cohort.

CONCLUSION

The HOME Score can be used to identify older adults at increased risk of possibly medication-related readmission within 30 days of discharge. The tool is easy to use and includes variables available in electronic health records at admission, thus making it possible to implement risk-reducing activities during the hospital stay as well as at discharge and in transitions of care. Further studies are needed to investigate the clinical usefulness of the HOME Score as well as the benefits of implemented activities.

Optimising prescribing in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in primary care (OPTICA): cluster randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To study the effects of a primary care medication review intervention centred around an electronic clinical decision support system (eCDSS) on appropriateness of medication and the number of prescribing omissions in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy compared with a discussion about medication in line with usual care.

DESIGN

Cluster randomised clinical trial.

SETTING

Swiss primary care, between December 2018 and February 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible patients were ≥65 years of age with three or more chronic conditions and five or more long term medications.

INTERVENTION

The intervention to optimise pharmacotherapy centred around an eCDSS was conducted by general practitioners, followed by shared decision making between general practitioners and patients, and was compared with a discussion about medication in line with usual care between patients and general practitioners.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were improvement in the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and the Assessment of Underutilisation (AOU) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included number of medications, falls, fractures, and quality of life.

RESULTS

In 43 general practitioner clusters, 323 patients were recruited (median age 77 (interquartile range 73-83) years; 45% (n=146) women). Twenty one general practitioners with 160 patients were assigned to the intervention group and 22 general practitioners with 163 patients to the control group. On average, one recommendation to stop or start a medication was reported to be implemented per patient. At 12 months, the results of the intention-to-treat analysis of the improvement in appropriateness of medication (odds ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.87) and the number of prescribing omissions (0.90, 0.41 to 1.96) were inconclusive. The same was the case for the per protocol analysis. No clear evidence was found for a difference in safety outcomes at the 12 month follow-up, but fewer safety events were reported in the intervention group than in the control group at six and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomised trial of general practitioners and older adults, the results were inconclusive as to whether the medication review intervention centred around the use of an eCDSS led to an improvement in appropriateness of medication or a reduction in prescribing omissions at 12 months compared with a discussion about medication in line with usual care. Nevertheless, the intervention could be safely delivered without causing any harm to patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03724539Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03724539.

Medication Review and Enhanced Information Transfer at Discharge of Older Patients with Polypharmacy: a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial in Swiss Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Medication safety in patients with polypharmacy at transitions of care is a focus of the current Third WHO Global Patient Safety Challenge. Medication review and communication between health care professionals are key targets to reduce medication-related harm.

OBJECTIVE

To study whether a hospital discharge intervention combining medication review with enhanced information transfer between hospital and primary care physicians can delay hospital readmission and impact health care utilization or other health-related outcomes of older inpatients with polypharmacy.

DESIGN

Cluster-randomized controlled trial in 21 Swiss hospitals between January 2019 and September 2020, with 6 months follow-up.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-eight senior physicians and their blinded junior physicians included 609 patients ≥ 60 years taking ≥ 5 drugs.

INTERVENTIONS

Participating hospitals were randomized to either integrate a checklist-guided medication review and communication stimulus into their discharge processes, or follow usual discharge routines.

MAIN MEASURES

Primary outcome was time-to-first-readmission to any hospital within 6 months, analyzed using a shared frailty model. Secondary outcomes covered readmission rates, emergency department visits, other medical consultations, mortality, drug numbers, proportions of patients with potentially inappropriate medication, and the patients' quality of life.

KEY RESULTS

At admission, 609 patients (mean age 77.5 (SD 8.6) years, 49.4% female) took a mean of 9.6 (4.2) drugs per patient. Time-to-first-readmission did not differ significantly between study arms (adjusted hazard ratio 1.14 (intervention vs. control arm), 95% CI [0.75-1.71], p = 0.54), nor did the 30-day hospital readmission rates (6.7% [3.3-10.1%] vs. 7.0% [3.6-10.3%]). Overall, there were no clinically relevant differences between study arms at 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of a structured medication review with enhanced information transfer neither delayed hospital readmission nor improved other health-related outcomes of older inpatients with polypharmacy. Our results may help researchers in balancing practicality versus stringency of similar hospital discharge interventions.

STUDY REGISTRATION

ISRCTN18427377, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18427377.

Medication review in hospitalised patients to reduce morbidity and mortality

BACKGROUND

A medication review can be defined as a structured evaluation of a patient's medication conducted by healthcare professionals with the aim of optimising medication use and improving health outcomes. Optimising medication therapy though medication reviews may benefit hospitalised patients.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the effects of medication review interventions in hospitalised adult patients compared to standard care or to other types of medication reviews on all-cause mortality, hospital readmissions, emergency department contacts and health-related quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

In this Cochrane Review update, we searched for new published and unpublished trials using the following electronic databases from 1 January 2014 to 17 January 2022 without language restrictions: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). To identify additional trials, we searched the reference lists of included trials and other publications by lead trial authors, and contacted experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of medication reviews delivered by healthcare professionals for hospitalised adult patients. We excluded trials including outpatients and paediatric patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for data clarification and relevant unpublished data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous data (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the overall certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we included a total of 25 trials (15,076 participants), of which 15 were new trials (11,501 participants). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 20 months. We found that medication reviews in hospitalised adults may have little to no effect on mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05; 18 trials, 10,108 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce hospital readmissions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 17 trials, 9561 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce emergency department contacts (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.03; 8 trials, 3527 participants; low-certainty evidence) and have very uncertain effects on health-related quality of life (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.30; 4 trials, 392 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Medication reviews in hospitalised adult patients likely reduce hospital readmissions and may reduce emergency department contacts. The evidence suggests that mediation reviews may have little to no effect on mortality, while the effect on health-related quality of life is very uncertain. Almost all trials included elderly polypharmacy patients, which limits the generalisability of the results beyond this population.

Consensus validation of a screening tool for cardiovascular pharmacotherapy in geriatric patients: the RASP_CARDIO list (Rationalization of Home Medication by an Adjusted STOPP list in Older Patients)

PURPOSE

Cardiovascular agents commonly used in geriatric patients, are linked to potentially avoidable harm and might hence be a suitable substrate for medication review practices. Therefore, we sought to update and validate the content of the cardiovascular segment of the previously published Rationalization of Home Medication by an Adjusted STOPP list in Older Patients (RASP) List.

METHODS

A three-step study was conducted by the pharmacy department in collaboration with the geriatric medicine and cardiology department at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. First, the cardiovascular segment of the RASP list version 2014 was updated taking into account published research, other screening tools and the input of end-users. Secondly, this draft was reviewed during three panel discussions with five expert cardiologists and three clinical pharmacists, all of whom had relevant expertise in geriatric pharmacotherapy. Thirdly, the content was validated using a modified Delphi Technique by a panel of European hospital pharmacists, cardiologists, geriatricians and an internal medicine physician.

RESULTS

After the first and second step, the RASP_CARDIO list comprised 94 statements. Consensus (≥ 80% agreement) of all statements and one new statement about gliflozins in heart failure was achieved by a panel of seventeen experts across four European countries after two validation rounds. The final construct comprised a list of 95 statements related to potentially inappropriate prescribing of cardiovascular agents.

CONCLUSION

The RASP_CARDIO list is an updated and validated explicit screening tool to optimize cardiovascular pharmacotherapy in geriatric patients.

Interdisciplinary collaboration across secondary and primary care to improve medication safety in the elderly (The IMMENSE study) - a randomized controlled trial

Background

Suboptimal medication use contributes to a substantial proportion of hospitalizations and emergency department visits in older adults. We designed a clinical pharmacist intervention to optimize medication therapy in older hospitalized patients. Based on the integrated medicine management (IMM) model, the 5-step IMMENSE intervention comprise medication reconciliation, medication review, reconciled medication list upon discharge, patient counselling, and post discharge communication with primary care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of the intervention on healthcare use and mortality.

Methods

A non-blinded parallel group randomized controlled trial was conducted in two internal medicine wards at the University Hospital of North Norway. Acutely admitted patients ≥ 70 years were randomized 1:1 to intervention or standard care (control). The primary outcome was the rate of emergency medical visits (readmissions and emergency department visits) 12 months after discharge.

Results

Of the 1510 patients assessed for eligibility, 662 patients were asked to participate, and 516 were enrolled. After withdrawal of consent and deaths in hospital, the modified intention-to-treat population comprised 480 patients with a mean age of 83.1 years (SD: 6.3); 244 intervention patients and 236 control patients. The number of emergency medical visits in the intervention and control group was 497 and 499, respectively, and no statistically significant difference was observed in rate of the primary outcome between the groups [adjusted incidence rate ratio of 1.02 (95% CI: 0.82–1.27)]. No statistically significant differences between groups were observed for any of the secondary outcomes, neither in subgroups, nor for the per-protocol population.

Conclusions

We did not observe any statistical significant effects of the IMMENSE intervention on the rate of emergency medical visits or any other secondary outcomes after 12 months in hospitalized older adults included in this study.

Trial registration

The trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov on 28/06/2016, before enrolment started (NCT02816086).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08648-1.

The effect of a trAnSitional Pharmacist Intervention in geRiatric inpatients on hospital visits after dischargE (ASPIRE): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Unplanned rehospitalizations occur frequently in older patients. Drug-related problems constitute a major and largely preventable cause with inappropriate prescribing being a substantial culprit. Solutions are needed to reduce this risk by targeting pharmacotherapy both during and after hospital stay. Therefore, we aim to perform a randomized controlled trial in geriatric inpatients to investigate the impact of a multifaceted clinical pharmacy intervention on health-related outcomes.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study concerns a monocenter, non-blinded, randomized controlled trial that will take place at the acute geriatric wards of a large academic hospital. Patients being in a palliative stage with active therapy withdrawal or patients discharged to another ward within the same hospital or another hospital are excluded. In total, 828 patients will be randomized (1:1) to the usual care or intervention group. The multifaceted clinical pharmacy intervention comprises medication reconciliation at admission and discharge, medication review, patient/caregiver education, intensified communication with primary care providers and post-discharge follow-up, which also includes a telepharmacology service. The primary endpoint is defined as the time to an all-cause, unplanned hospital revisit within six months after discharge. Other health-related outcomes such as drug-related readmissions, quality of life and number of potentially inappropriate medications will be analyzed as secondary endpoints. Patient inclusion started in February 2021.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide useful insights regarding the impact of clinical pharmacy interventions on geriatric wards with the goal to optimize health-related outcomes such as hospital revisits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04617340.

A qualitative dual-site analysis of the pharmacist discharge care (PHARM-DC) intervention using the CFIR framework

Introduction

Older adults face several challenges when transitioning from acute hospitals to community-based care. The PHARMacist Discharge Care (PHARM-DC) intervention is a pharmacist-led Transitions of Care (TOC) program intended to reduce 30-day hospital readmissions and emergency department visits at two large hospitals. This study used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) framework to evaluate pharmacist perceptions of the PHARM-DC intervention.

Methods

Intervention pharmacists and pharmacy administrators were purposively recruited by study team members located within each participating institution. Study team members located within each institution coordinated with two study authors unaffiliated with the institutions implementing the intervention to conduct interviews and focus groups remotely via telecommunication software. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, with transcriptions imported into NVivo for qualitative analysis. Qualitative analysis was performed using an iterative process to identify “a priori” constructs based on CFIR domains (intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation) and to create overarching themes as identified during coding.

Results

In total, ten semi-structured interviews and one focus group were completed across both hospitals. At Site A, six interviews were conducted with intervention pharmacists and pharmacists in administrative roles. Also at Site A, one focus group comprised of five intervention pharmacists was conducted. At Site B, interviews were conducted with four intervention pharmacists and pharmacists in administrative roles. Three overarching themes were identified: PHARM-DC and Institutional Context, Importance of PHARM-DC Adaptability, and Recommendations for PHARM-DC Improvement and Sustainability. Increasing pharmacist support for technical tasks and navigating pharmacist-patient language barriers were important to intervention implementation and delivery. Identifying cost-savings and quantifying outcomes as a result of the intervention were particularly important when considering how to sustain and expand the PHARM-DC intervention.

Conclusion

The PHARM-DC intervention can successfully be implemented at two institutions with considerable variations in TOC initiatives, resources, and staffing. Future implementation of PHARM-DC interventions should consider the themes identified, including an examination of institution-specific contextual factors such as the roles that pharmacy technicians may play in TOC interventions, the importance of intervention adaptability to account for patient needs and institutional resources, and pharmacist recommendations for intervention improvement and sustainability.

Trial registration

NCT04071951.

Drug-related emergency department visits in older patients: an applicability and reliability study of an existing assessment tool

BACKGROUND

AT-HARM10 is a research tool to identify possible drug-related hospital admissions. It is unclear whether the tool can be applied to emergency department visits as well.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability and reliability to identify drug-related emergency department visits in older patients with AT-HARM10.

METHOD

A random sample of 400 patients aged 65 years or older from a clinical trial in four Swedish hospitals was selected. All patients' emergency department visits within 12 months after discharge were assessed with AT-HARM10. The main outcome measures were the percentage of successfully assessed visits for applicability and the interrater reliability (Cohen's kappa).

RESULTS

Of the initial sample (n = 400), 113 patients [median age (interquartile range): 81 (76-88) years] had at least one emergency department visit within 12 months. The patients had in total 184 visits, of which 179 (97%) were successfully assessed. Fifty-three visits (29%) were possibly drug-related. The Cohen's kappa value was 0.70 (substantial).

CONCLUSION

It seems applicable and reliable to identify possible drug-related emergency department visits in addition to hospital admissions in older patients with AT-HARM10. As a consequence, the tool has been updated to support its novel use in clinical research.

Intervention fidelity and process outcomes of the IMMENSE study, a pharmacist-led interdisciplinary intervention to improve medication safety in older hospitalized patients

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The majority of hospitalized older patients experience medication-related problems (MRPs), and there is a call for interventions to solve MRPs and improve clinical outcomes like medical visits. The IMMENSE study is a randomized controlled trial investigating the impact of a pharmacist-led interdisciplinary intervention on emergency medical visits. Its multistep intervention is based on the integrated medicines management methodology and includes a follow-up step with primary care. This study aims to describe how the intervention in the IMMENSE study was delivered and its process outcomes.

METHODS

The study includes the 221 intervention patients in the per-protocol group of the IMMENSE study. Both intervention delivery, reasons for not performing interventions and process outcomes were registered daily by the study pharmacists in a Microsoft Access^® database. Process outcomes were medication discrepancies, MRPs and how the team solved these.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 121 (54.8%) patients received all intervention steps if appropriate. All patients received medication reconciliation (MedRec) and medication Review (MedRev) (step 1 and 2), while between 10% and 20% of patients were missed for medication list in discharge summary (step 3), patient counselling (step 4), or communication with general practitioner and nurse (step 5). A total of 437 discrepancies were identified in 159 (71.9%) patients during MedRec, and 1042 MRPs were identified in 209 (94.6%) patients during MedRev. Of these, 292 (66.8%) and 700 (67.2%), respectively, were communicated to and solved by the interdisciplinary team during the hospital stay.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The fidelity of the single steps of the intervention was high even though only about half of the patients received all intervention steps. The impact of the intervention may be influenced by not implementing all steps in all patients, but the many discrepancies and MRPs identified and solved for the patients could explain a potential effect of the IMMENSE study.

Assessment of requests for medication-related follow-up after hospital discharge, and the relation to unplanned hospital revisits, in older patients: a multicentre retrospective chart review

BACKGROUND

The discharge of older hospitalised patients is critical in terms of patient safety. Inadequate transfer of information about medications to the next healthcare provider is a known problem, but there is a lack of understanding of this problem in settings where shared electronic health records are used. The aims of this study were to evaluate the prevalence of patients for whom hospitals sent adequate requests for medication-related follow-up at discharge, the proportion of patients with unplanned hospital revisits because of inadequate follow-up requests, and the association between medication reviews performed during hospitalisation and adequate or inadequate follow-up requests.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review. The study population was randomly selected from a cluster-randomised crossover trial which included patients 65 years or older who had been admitted to three hospitals in Sweden with shared electronic health records between hospital and primary care. Each patient was assessed with respect to the adequacy of the request for follow-up. For patients where the hospitals sent inadequate requests, data about any unplanned hospital revisits were collected, and we assessed whether the inadequate requests had contributed to the revisits. The association between medication reviews and adequate or inadequate requests was analysed with a Chi-square test.

RESULTS

A total of 699 patients were included. The patients' mean age was 80 years; an average of 10 medications each were prescribed on hospital admission. The hospitals sent an adequate request for 418 (60%) patients. Thirty-eight patients (14%) had a hospital revisit within six months of discharge which was related to an inadequate request. The proportion of adequate or inadequate requests did not differ between patients who had received a medication review during hospitalisation and those who had not (p = 0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of patients for whom the hospitals sent adequate follow-up requests on discharge was low. More than one in every ten who had an inadequate request revisited hospital within six months of discharge for reasons related to the request. Medication reviews conducted during hospitalisation did not affect the proportion of adequate or inadequate requests sent. A communication gap still exists despite the usage of a shared electronic health record between primary and secondary care levels.

Commentary: how person-centred is pharmaceutical care?

Health systems in many countries are currently undergoing an evolution towards more person-centred care. However, an overview of the literature shows that there is little or no guidance available on how to apply person-centred care to pharmaceutical care and clinical pharmacy practices. In this paper we apply a model for person-centred care created by a national multidisciplinary research centre in Gothenburg, Sweden, to the clinical work tasks of outpatient and inpatient pharmacists and describe how pharmaceutical care can become more person-centred.