Consolidated Medication Review Algorithm to Improve Medications Use in Older Adults: Components, Scoring Scheme, and Implementation

Development, validation and evaluation of an online medication review tool (MedReview)

Objectives

To develop, validate and evaluate a computerized clinical decision support system (MedReview) that aids medication reviewers with pharmacological decision-making.

Methods

This study included three phases; the development phase included computerizing a consolidated medication review algorithm (MedReview), followed by validation and evaluation of MedReview and responding to a web-based survey designed using patient scenarios. Participants had to be ‘fully registered’ with the Malaysian Pharmacy Board and work full-time at a community pharmacy.

Results

MedReview was developed as a web app. It was validated among 100 community pharmacists from May-July 2021 using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). There was acceptable content validity and fair inter-rater agreement, and good convergent and discriminant validity. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in five domains to determine the attitude of pharmacists about using MedReview: perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, intention to use, trust, and personal initiatives and characteristics; the total variance explained by five factors was 76.36%. The survey questionnaire had a high overall reliability value of 0.96. Evaluation of MedReview was based on mean scores of survey items. Of all items included in the survey, the highest mean score (out of 7) was achieved for ‘I could use MedReview if it is meaningful/relevant to my daily tasks’ (5.78 ± 1.10), followed by ‘I could use MedReview if I feel confident that the data returned by MedReview is reliable’ (5.77 ± 1.21), and ‘I could use MedReview if it protects the privacy of its users’ (5.73 ± 1.20).

Conclusion

Community pharmacists generally had a positive attitude towards MedReview. They found that MedReview is trustworthy and they had the intention to use it when conducting medication reviews. The adaptation of the TAM in the survey instrument was reliable and internally valid.

Frailty and potentially inappropriate medications using the 2019 Beers Criteria: findings from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health (ALSWH)

BACKGROUND

Frailty is an essential consideration with potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), especially among older women.

AIMS

This study determined the use of potentially inappropriate medications according to frailty status using the Beers Criteria 2019, identified medications that should be flagged as potentially inappropriate and harmful depending on individual health factors, and determined the association between frailty and PIMs, adjusted for characteristics associated with PIMs.

METHODS

This prospective longitudinal study included 9355 participants aged 77-82 years at baseline (2003). Frailty was measured using the FRAIL (fatigue, resistance, ambulation, illness and loss of weight) scale. Generalised estimating equations using log-binomial regressions determined the association between frailty and risk of using PIMs.

RESULTS

Among participants who were frail and non-frail at baseline, the majority used ≥ 3 PIMs (74.2% and 58.5%, respectively). At 2017, the proportion using ≥ 3 PIMs remained constant in the frail group (72.0%) but increased in the non-frail group (66.0%). Commonly prescribed medications that may be potentially inappropriate in both groups included benzodiazepines, proton-pump inhibitors and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and risperidone was an additional contributor in the non-frail group. When adjusted for other characteristics, frail women had a 2% higher risk of using PIMs (RR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01, 1.03).

CONCLUSION

Given that the majority of frail women were using medications that may have been potentially inappropriate, it is important to consider both frailty and PIMs as indicators of health outcomes, and to review the need for PIMs for women aged 77-96 years who are frail.

Innovating medication reviews through a technology-enabled process

Medication reviews are effective in improving the quality of medication use among older people. However, they are conducted to various standards resulting in a wide range of outcomes which limit generalisability of findings arising from research studies. There also appear to be funding and time constraints, lack of data storage for quality improvement purposes, and non-standardised reporting of outcomes, especially clinically relevant outcomes. Furthermore, the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has restricted many face-to-face activities, including medication reviews. This article introduces a technology-enabled approach to medication reviews that may overcome some limitations with current medication review processes, and also make it possible to conduct medication reviews during the COVID-19 pandemic by providing an alternate platform. The possible advantages of this technology-enabled approach, legislative considerations and possible implementation in practice are discussed.