Antidepressants in nursing homes for dependent older patients: the cross-sectional associations of institutional factors with prescription conformance

National Trends in Antidepressant Use in Australian Residential Aged Care Facilities (2006-2019)

OBJECTIVES

Antipsychotics have been the focus of reforms for improving the appropriateness of psychotropic medicine use in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Comprehensive evaluation of antidepressant use in RACFs is required to inform policy and practice initiatives targeting psychotropic medicines. This study examined national trends in antidepressant use among older people living in RACFs from 2006 to 2019.

DESIGN

National repeated cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Individuals aged 65 to 105 years who were permanent, long-term (≥100 days) residents of Australian RACFs between January 2006 and December 2019 were included.

METHODS

Annual age- and sex-adjusted antidepressant prevalence rates and defined daily doses (DDDs) supplied per 1000 resident-days from 2006 to 2019 were determined. Age- and sex-adjusted prevalence rate ratios (aRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Poisson and negative binomial regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 779,659 residents of 3371 RACFs were included (786,227,380 resident-days). Overall, antidepressant use increased from 46.1% (95% CI, 45.9-46.4) in 2006 to 58.5% (95% CI, 58.3-58.8) of residents in 2019 (aRR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02-1.02). Mirtazapine use increased from 8.4% (95% CI, 8.2-8.5) to 20.9% (95% CI, 20.7-21.1) from 2006 to 2019 (aRR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.07-1.07). Antidepressant use increased from 350.3 (95% CI, 347.6-353.1) to 506.0 (95% CI, 502.8-509.3) DDDs/1000 resident-days (aRR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.03-1.03), with mirtazapine utilization increasing by 6% annually (aRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.06-1.06).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This nationwide study identified a substantial increase in antidepressant use among residents of Australian RACFs, largely driven by mirtazapine. With nearly 3 in every 5 residents treated with an antidepressant in 2019, findings highlight potential off-label use and suggest that interventions to optimize care are urgently needed.

Interventions to optimize medication use in nursing homes: a narrative review

PURPOSE

Polypharmacy, medication errors and adverse drug events are frequent among nursing home residents. Errors can occur at any step of the medication use process. We aimed to review interventions aiming at optimization of any step of medication use in nursing homes.

METHODS

We narratively reviewed quantitative as well as qualitative studies, observational and experimental studies that described interventions, their effects as well as barriers and enablers to implementation. We prioritized recent studies with relevant findings for the European setting.

RESULTS

Many interventions led to improvements in medication use. However, because of outcome heterogeneity, comparison between interventions was difficult. Prescribing was the most studied aspect of medication use. At the micro-level, medication review, multidisciplinary work, and more recently, patient-centered care components dominated. At the macro-level, guidelines and legislation, mainly for specific medication classes (e.g., antipsychotics) were employed. Utilization of technology also helped improve medication administration. Several barriers and enablers were reported, at individual, organizational, and system levels.

CONCLUSION

Overall, existing interventions are effective in optimizing medication use. However there is a need for further European well-designed and large-scale evaluations of under-researched intervention components (e.g., health information technology, patient-centered approaches), specific medication classes (e.g., antithrombotic agents), and interventions targeting medication use aspects other than prescribing (e.g., monitoring). Further development and uptake of core outcome sets is required. Finally, qualitative studies on barriers and enablers for intervention implementation would enable theory-driven intervention design.

Factors Associated With Hospital Presentation of Self-Harm Among Older Canadians in Long-Term Care: A 12-Year Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to examine the incidence of, and factors associated with, hospital presentation for self-harm among older Canadians in long-term care (LTC).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The LTC data were collected using Resident Assessment Instrument-Minimum Data Set (RAI-MDS) and Resident Assessment Instrument-Home Care (RAI-HC), and linked to the Discharge Abstract Database (DAD) with hospital records of self-harm diagnosis. Adults aged 60+ at first assessment between April 1, 2003, and March 31, 2015, were included.

METHODS

Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of self-harm for potentially relevant factors, including demographic, clinical, and psychosocial characteristics, were calculated using Fine & Gray competing risk models.

RESULTS

Records were collated of 465,870 people in long-term care facilities (LTCF), and 773,855 people receiving home care (HC). Self-harm incidence per 100,000 person-years was 20.76 [95% confidence interval (CI) 20.31-25.40] for LTCF and 46.64 (44.24-49.12) for HC. In LTCF, the strongest risks were younger age (60-74 years vs 90+: HR, 6.00; 95% CI, 3.24-11.12), psychiatric disorders (bipolar disorder: 3.46; 2.32-5.16; schizophrenia: 2.31; 1.47-3.62; depression: 2.29; 1.80-2.92), daily severe pain (2.01; 1.30-3.11), and daily tobacco consumption (1.78; 1.29-2.45). For those receiving HC, the strongest risk factors were younger age (60-74 years vs 90+: 2.54; 1.97-3.28), psychiatric disorders (2.20; 1.93-2.50), daily tobacco consumption (2.08; 1.81-2.39), and frequent falls (1.98; 1.46-2.68). All model interactions between setting and factors were significant.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

There was lower incidence of hospital presentation for self-harm for LTCF residents than HC recipients. We found sizable risks of self-harm associated with several modifiable risk factors, some of which can be directly addressed by better treatment and care (psychiatric disorders and pain), whereas others require through more complex interventions that target underlying factors and causes (tobacco and falls). The findings highlight a need for setting- and risk-specific prevention strategies to address self-harm in the older populations.