Terms used to describe and define activities undertaken as a result of the medication review process: Do they require standardisation? A systematic review

Fall Outcomes in Older Adults Following Benzodiazepine/Z-Drug Discontinuation: A Retrospective Cohort Study in an Academic Health System

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines and z-drugs increase the fall risk in older adults. There is a lack of real-world data examining the association between falls and deprescribing medications.

OBJECTIVE

In a retrospective cohort study of older adults with chronic benzodiazepine or z-drug use receiving care at an academic health system from January 2017 to December 2020, we explored the association between medication discontinuation and falls.

METHODS

Chronic use was defined as ≥ 3 medication dispensings and cumulative days' supply ≥ 45 days within 100 days in 2018. Discontinuation was defined as a dispensing gap of ≥ 180 days within 1 year of chronic use eligibility, with a secondary definition requiring a gap of ≥ 90 days. Non-discontinuers (n = 524) were matched 4:1 to discontinuers (n = 131) if they had a fill in the same month as the matched discontinuation index date. The association between discontinuation and a fall during 2.25-year follow-up was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. The analysis was repeated using a gap of ≥ 90 days (n = 279 discontinuers; 1116 matched non-discontinuers).

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of falls-related acute visits was 6.9% for discontinuers and 9.7% for non-discontinuers [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-1.31]. Using the 90-day-gap definition, the cumulative incidence was 9.3% for discontinuers and 8.5% for non-discontinuers (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.70-1.77).

CONCLUSION

Benzodiazepine/z-drug discontinuation was not associated with reduced risk of falls. However, the relationship between discontinuation and falls varies depending on the definitions used. It is essential to examine different discontinuation definitions in larger studies while considering other relevant clinical outcomes.

Use of the BRANT-MERQS scoring table for the quality assessment of type 3 medication review in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and those with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Background

A type 3 medication review (MR3) is a patient-centred medication service primarily provided by pharmacists and is presently employed routinely in several countries. In this process, pharmacists interview patients and collaborate with the treating physician to optimize the patient's pharmacotherapy, taking into account the patient's medication history and other medical data including laboratory values. The need to maintain the quality of such interventions during and after their initial implementation cannot be overstated.

Aim

The objective of this study was to refine and assess a scoring table to evaluate the quality of MR3 conducted in Belgian community pharmacies.

Methods

The comprehensive quality of MR3s was assessed by scoring its various components using a previously developed scoring table, called BRANT-MERQS, Brussels Antwerp Medication Review Quality Score. MR3s were analysed from an implementation study with patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis (RA, subproject 1) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM, subproject 2). Additional information was obtained during a telephone call with a subset of participating pharmacists of subproject 1 who finalized their first MR3.

Results

In subproject 1, a total of 21 MR3s of patients with RA were examined. The assessment showed favourable scores for elements such as a well-organized medication schedule, treatment adherence, and the elaboration of specific interventions. However, certain other quality criteria posed challenges in the evaluation, for example, the use of simple and understandable language. Pharmacists faced time constraints, and elderly general practitioners (GPs) displayed limited enthusiasm, which were notable barriers observed for this subproject. In the context of subproject 2 that investigated 41 MR3s in patients with T2DM, the quality criteria of interaction between pharmacist and GP, and used sources and tools received high scores. However, there was still room for improvement, especially in areas such as accurate dosing, handling kidney function, QT prolongation, correctly associating laboratory values with relevant drugs and medical conditions, and optimisation of medication schedules for patients.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated the feasibility of MR3 quality assessment through a scoring system. However, it also unveiled the tool's current imperfections and highlighted the ongoing need for refinement, something expected of a new service in an implementation phase.

Medication Review: What's in a Name and What Is It about?

BACKGROUND

Medication review is a multifaceted service aimed at optimizing the use of medicines and enhancing the health outcomes of patients. Due to its complexity, it is crucial to clearly describe the service, its variants, and its components to avoid confusion and ensure a better understanding of medication review among healthcare providers.

AIM

This study aims to bring clarity to the origins, definitions, abbreviations, and types of medication reviews, together with the primary criteria that delineate key features of this service.

METHOD

A narrative review approach was employed to clarify the diverse terminology associated with "medication review" services. Relevant references were initially identified through searches on PubMed and Google Scholar, complementing the existing literature known to the authors.

RESULTS

The study uncovers a complicated and sometimes convoluted history of "medication review" in different regions around the world. The initial optimization of medicine use had an economic purpose before evolving subsequently into a more patient-oriented approach. A selection of abbreviations, definitions, and types were outlined to enhance the understanding of the service.

CONCLUSIONS

The study underscores the urgent need for comprehensive information and standardization regarding the content and quality of the services, collectively referred to as "medication review".

Exploring medication safety structures and processes in nursing homes: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Medication safety is important to limit adverse events for nursing home residents. Several factors, such as interprofessional collaboration with pharmacists and medication reviews, have been shown in the literature to influence medication safety processes.

AIM

This study had three main objectives: (1) To assess how facility- and unit-level organization and infrastructure are related to medication use processes; (2) To determine the extent of medication safety-relevant processes; and (3) To explore pharmacies' and pharmacists' involvement in nursing homes' medication-related processes.

METHOD

Cross-sectional multicenter survey data (2018-2019) from a convenience sample of 118 Swiss nursing homes were used. Data were collected on facility and unit characteristics, pharmacy services, as well as medication safety-related structures and processes. Descriptive statistics were used.

RESULTS

Most of the participating nursing homes (93.2%) had electronic resident health record systems that supported medication safety in various ways (e.g., medication lists, interaction checks). Electronic data exchanges with outside partners such as pharmacies or physicians were available for fewer than half (10.2-46.3%, depending on the partner). Pharmacists collaborating with nursing homes were mainly involved in logistical support. Medication reviews were reportedly conducted regularly in two-thirds of facilities.

CONCLUSION

A high proportion of Swiss nursing homes have implemented diverse processes and structures that support medication use and safety for residents; however, their collaboration with pharmacists remains relatively limited.

Key elements in the quality assessment of a type 3 medication review

Background: Medication reviews are a structured evaluation of a patient's pharmacotherapy with the aim of optimizing medicines use and improving health outcomes. This entails detecting drug related problems and recommending interventions. A high level of quality is essential for the successful implementation of this service in community pharmacies but currently there is no instrument or tool to assess that overall quality. Aim: This study investigated the development of quality criteria of type 3 medication reviews (MR3s). Methods: After surveying the literature, an electronic questionnaire was developed to gather information about quality criteria for MR3. This survey, in Dutch, was distributed electronically. Four groups were queried: 1) pharmacists, mainly working in the Netherlands, involved in practice research and contacted through the PRISMA (Practice Research In Collaboration With Pharmacists) foundation, 2) Belgian pharmacy academics and pharmacists active in professional associations (APA), 3) Belgian pharmacists trained in medication review (MR) by the Royal Pharmacists Association of Antwerp (KAVA) and 4) Belgian pharmacy students. The survey included 57 criteria, divided into eight domains, which were ranked according to their importance by the participants. The results were analyzed statistically using the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The survey was completed by 95 participants, including 42 PRISMA pharmacists, 19 APA pharmacists, 18 KAVA pharmacists and 16 pharmacy students. Opinions from participants from the different groups overlapped significantly. The use of simple and understandable language in the conversation with the patient was considered essential by the majority. Discussing the usefulness and purpose of a MR3 with the patient was also rated highly by all groups. Differences of opinion were present in aspects about laboratory values, the use of specific tools, and reporting to and consultation with the treating physician. The participants themselves formulated a limited number of additional assessment criteria. Conclusion: There was widespread agreement on the hierarchy of the quality assessment criteria for MR3s. Minor differences were related to the experience of the participants. With these results and a small number of suggested extra criteria, a quality assessment instrument for MR3 can be created.