Cluster-Controlled Trial of an Intervention to Improve Prescribing in Nursing Homes Study

Deprescribing benzodiazepine receptor agonists in older adults: a mixed-methods study to adapt the Canadian D-PRESCRIBE intervention to the Belgian community setting

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines recommend deprescribing benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRA) in older adults, yet implementation in clinical practice remains limited. Adapting effective, evidence-based interventions to a new context is a resource-saving strategy. In Canada, the D-PRESCRIBE intervention comprised a patient educational brochure and a pharmaceutical opinion inviting physicians to revise BZRA prescribing and consider safer alternatives. Due to its effectiveness on BZRA deprescribing among Canadian older adults, we aimed to adapt the D-PRESCRIBE intervention to the Belgian community setting.

DESIGN

Recommendations from the ADAPT guidance, that provides a systematic approach for adapting interventions to new contexts, were followed. We conducted a mixed-methods study that comprised (1) group discussions and cognitive interviews to assess the acceptability and need for adaptation of the intervention's components and (2) a survey on the adapted pharmaceutical opinion. A research committee involving stakeholders' representatives decided on the adaptations, respecting the core functions of both tools. Changes in intervention components were reported following the Model for Adaptation Design and Impact framework.

SETTING

Belgian French-speaking community setting.

PARTICIPANTS

Six older adults (≥65 years), six general practitioners (GPs) and seven pharmacists participated in the group discussions or interviews. 46 GPs and 91 pharmacists responded to the survey.

RESULTS

Participants welcomed the brochure positively. Still, some changes in the vocabulary, wording, photos and icons were made for several purposes including making the patient feel concerned about the brochure and softening the use of fear. The pharmaceutical opinion aroused mixed perceptions. Its name, layout and content were adapted to enhance its acceptability and fit with our healthcare system, practices and national guidelines. The survey highlighted several enablers and barriers to its use from the perspectives of GP and pharmacist.

CONCLUSIONS

The Canadian D-PRESCRIBE intervention was adapted to the Belgian setting following a thorough and transparent process. Its feasibility will be tested in a future pilot study (NCT:05929417).

Development of a Behavior-Change Intervention toward Benzodiazepine Deprescribing in Older Adults Living in Nursing Homes

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop a context-specific intervention toward benzodiazepine deprescribing in nursing homes (NHs), with insights from behavior-change theories and involvement of stakeholders.

DESIGN

Selection of behavior change techniques (BCTs), through online survey and group discussion, followed by operationalization of these BCTs into intervention components.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The intervention was developed for Belgian NHs, involving various stakeholders: health care professionals (HCPs), NH administrators, and policy makers.

METHODS

Using the Theory and Techniques Tool, we preselected the BCTs linked to one of the 9 Theoretical Domain Framework domains identified as being the main barriers for benzodiazepine deprescribing in Belgian NHs. These were then presented to stakeholders. Based on the APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side-effects, and Ethics) criteria, participants ranked BCTs through an online survey, and then performed final selection during a group discussion. Selected BCTs were operationalized into intervention components, with specific contents and methods of delivery validated by stakeholders.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven potential BCTs were identified. Eighteen stakeholders participated in the survey, and 7 in the group discussion. This led to the final inclusion of 9 BCTs: instruction on how to perform the behavior, information about health consequences, pros and cons, problem solving, goal setting (behavior), social comparison, restructuring physical environment, restructuring social environment, and graded tasks. These BCTs were operationalized into a 6-component intervention: process and goal setting, HCP education, physical environment adaptations, audit and feedback, NH residents' and relatives' increased awareness, and multidisciplinary work.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Use of a theory-based approach toward intervention development has the potential to improve the probability of its feasibility and effectiveness in tackling barriers to benzodiazepine deprescribing. By doing so, we have developed a multifaceted approach with actions taken at the patient, HCP, and NH levels. Our novel 6-component intervention will be evaluated in a pilot cluster-randomized controlled trial to assess its feasibility.

Current situation, strengths and problems in intra- and interprofessional collaboration in German nursing homes - A holistic multiple case study

BACKGROUND

The increasing care complexity of nursing home residents living with dementia requires new care models that strengthen professional collaboration. To contribute to the sustainable implementation of new care models, it is important that they are linked to the care reality. However, little is known about intra- and interprofessional organization and provision of care in German nursing homes. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the current care situation, problems and strengths regarding intra- and interprofessional collaboration in the care of residents living with dementia.

METHODS

We conducted a holistic multiple case study. The individual care units in which residents living with dementia are cared for were defined as cases. The context was built by the respective nursing homes and their regional affiliation to the federal state of North Rhine-Westphalia. We used qualitative face-to-face interviews, documents and context questionnaires for data collection. The different sources of evidence served to capture complementary perspectives and to validate the findings. First, the collected qualitative data were analyzed using deductive-inductive content analysis. Second, similarities and differences between the cases were identified to elaborate case-specific and cross-case patterns and themes. The reporting followed the EQUATOR reporting guideline for organizational case studies.

RESULTS

We included four care units comprising 21 professionals (nurses, physicians, social worker, physiotherapist, pharmacist) and 14 relatives of residents living with dementia. The analysis revealed four categories to describe current intra- and interprofessional collaboration in all cases: actors and their roles, service delivery, coordination and governance, and communication channel. Moreover, we identified three categories that relate to the strengths and problems of intra- and interprofessional collaboration in all cases: role understanding, teamwork, and communication and exchange. Although we examined similar care units, we found differences in the realization of professional collaboration and resulting problems and strengths that are connected to the organizational contexts and strategies used.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though professional collaboration follows given patterns; these patterns do differ context-specifically and are perceived as problematic and fragmentary. Therefore, the identified differences and problems in collaboration need to be addressed in future research to develop and successfully implement tailored innovative care models.

Person-centred medicine in the care home setting: development of a complex intervention

BACKGROUND

Person-centred medicine is recommended in the care of older patients. Yet, involvement of care home residents and relatives in medication processes remains limited in routine care. Therefore, we aimed to develop a complex intervention focusing on resident and relative involvement and interprofessional communication to support person-centred medicine in the care home setting.

METHODS

The development took place from October 2021 to March 2022 in the Municipality of Aarhus, Denmark. The study followed the Medical Research Council guidance on complex intervention development using a combination of theoretical, evidence-based, and partnership approaches. The patient involvement tool, the PREparation of Patients for Active Involvement in medication Review (PREPAIR), was included in a preliminary intervention model. Study activities included developing programme theory, engaging stakeholders, and exploring key uncertainties through interviews, co-producing workshops, and testing with end-users to develop the intervention and an implementation strategy. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Interprofessional Shared Decision Making Model were used. Data were analysed using a rapid analysis approach.

RESULTS

Before the workshops, six residents and four relatives were interviewed. Based on their feedback, PREPAIR was modified to the PREPAIR care home to fit the care home population. In total, ten persons participated in the co-producing workshops, including health care professionals and municipal managerial and quality improvement staff. The developed intervention prototype was tested for three residents and subsequently refined to the final intervention, including two fixed components (PREPAIR care home and an interprofessional medication communication template) delivered in a flexible three-stage workflow. Additionally, a multi-component implementation strategy was formed. In line with the developed programme theory, the intervention supported health care professionals´ awareness about resident and relative involvement. It provided a structure for involvement, empowered the residents to speak, and brought new insights through dialogue, thereby supporting involvement in medication-related decisions. The final intervention was perceived to be relevant, acceptable, and feasible in the care home setting.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the final intervention may be a viable approach to facilitate person-centred medicine through resident and relative involvement. This will be further explored in a planned feasibility study.

Prescribing and deprescribing in older people with life-limiting illnesses receiving hospice care at the end of life: A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although prescribing and deprescribing practices in older people have been the subject of much research generally, there are limited data in older people at the end of life. This highlights the need for research to determine prescribing and deprescribing patterns, as a first step to facilitate guideline development for medicines optimisation in this vulnerable population.

AIMS

To examine prescribing and deprescribing patterns in older people at the end of life and to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use.

DESIGN

A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study where medical records of eligible participants were reviewed, and data extracted. Medication appropriateness was assessed using two sets of consensus-based criteria; the STOPPFrail criteria and criteria developed by Morin et al.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Decedents aged 65 years and older admitted continuously for at least 14 days before death to three inpatient hospice units across Northern Ireland, who died between 1st January and 31st December 2018, and who had a known diagnosis, known cause of death and prescription data. Unexpected/sudden deaths were excluded.

RESULTS

Polypharmacy was reported to be continued until death in 96.2% of 106 decedents (mean age of 75.6 years). Most patients received at least one potentially inappropriate medication at the end of life according to the STOPPFrail and the criteria developed by Morin et al. (57.5 and 69.8% respectively). Limited prevalence of proactive deprescribing interventions was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of systematic rationalisation of drug treatments, a substantial proportion of older patients continued to receive potentially inappropriate medication until death.

Deprescribing Interventions for Older Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Deprescribing reduces polypharmacy in older adults. A thorough study of the effect of deprescribing interventions on clinical outcomes in older adults is presently lacking. As a result, we evaluated the impact of deprescribing on clinical outcomes in older patients.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from the time of creation to March 2023.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized controlled trial with participants at least 60 years old.

MEASURES

Mortality, falls (number of fallers), hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, medication adherence, HRQoL (health-regulated quality of life), incidence of ADR (adverse drug reactions), PIM (potentially inappropriate medication), and PPO (potentially prescription omission) were evaluated in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 32 RCTs (18,670 patients) were included. Deprescribing interventions significantly reduced proportions of older adults with PIM, PPO, and the incidence of ADRs. The interventions group also improved medication compliance.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Compared to routine care, deprescribing interventions significantly improve clinical outcome indicators for older adults.

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, so that many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients. This is the third update of this Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions, alone or in combination, in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers up until 13 January 2021, together with handsearching of reference lists to identify additional studies. We ran updated searches in February 2023 and have added potentially eligible studies to 'Characteristics of studies awaiting classification'.

SELECTION CRITERIA

For this update, we included randomised trials only. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy (four or more medicines) in people aged 65 years and older, which used a validated tool to assess prescribing appropriateness. These tools can be classified as either implicit tools (judgement-based/based on expert professional judgement) or explicit tools (criterion-based, comprising lists of drugs to be avoided in older people).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, and two authors extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We pooled study-specific estimates, and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 38 studies, which includes an additional 10 in this update. The included studies consisted of 24 randomised trials and 14 cluster-randomised trials. Thirty-six studies examined complex, multi-faceted interventions of pharmaceutical care (i.e. the responsible provision of medicines to improve patients' outcomes), in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals such as general physicians, pharmacists, nurses and geriatricians, and most were conducted in high-income countries. Assessments using the Cochrane risk of bias tool found that there was a high and/or unclear risk of bias across a number of domains. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall certainty of evidence for each pooled outcome ranged from low to very low. It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care improves medication appropriateness (as measured by an implicit tool) (mean difference (MD) -5.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.26 to -2.06; I2 = 97%; 8 studies, 947 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.05; I2 = 67%; 9 studies, 2404 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PIM (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98; I2 = 84%; 13 studies, 4534 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may slightly reduce the number of potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) (SMD -0.48, 95% CI -1.05 to 0.09; I2 = 92%; 3 studies, 691 participants; low-certainty evidence), however it must be noted that this effect estimate is based on only three studies, which had serious limitations in terms of risk of bias. Likewise, it is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PPO (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.91; I2 = 95%; 7 studies, 2765 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference to hospital admissions (data not pooled; 14 studies, 4797 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference to quality of life (data not pooled; 16 studies, 7458 participants; low-certainty evidence). Medication-related problems were reported in 10 studies (6740 participants) using different terms (e.g. adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions). No consistent intervention effect on medication-related problems was noted across studies. This also applied to studies examining adherence to medication (nine studies, 3848 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy resulted in clinically significant improvement. Since the last update of this review in 2018, there appears to have been an increase in the number of studies seeking to address potential prescribing omissions and more interventions being delivered by multidisciplinary teams.

Cluster randomized trials in nursing homes should better be planned as open-cohort than as closed-cohort

OBJECTIVES

Two designs are frequently used in cluster randomized trials in nursing homes: closed cohort and open cohort. The former design includes residents at the beginning of the trial and then follows them. In the latter design, participants are enrolled at the beginning of the trial or although it is ongoing; at dates of assessment, all residents present in the nursing home are assessed. The open-cohort design is much less used than the closed-cohort design, but it offers several advantages such as less exposure to individual attrition. Objective was to assess whether an open-cohort design could have been feasible in trials with a closed-cohort design.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Twenty-two closed-cohort trials in nursing homes.

RESULTS

An open-cohort design was considered a relevant alternative for 20 trials. For 16 trials, a resident newly admitted could not opt out of the intervention, and for all trials, the resident could benefit from an intervention effect if it existed. For two trials, newly admitted residents could not benefit from the intervention effect, if it existed.

CONCLUSION

The open-cohort design is well-adapted for most of the interventions assessed in nursing homes by means of a cluster randomized trial and should be considered more often.

Intervention of pharmacist included in multidisciplinary team to reduce adverse drug event: a qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Preventable harm in healthcare is a growing public health challenge. In addition to the economic costs of safety failures, adverse drug events (ADE) may lead to complication or even death. Multidisciplinary care team involving a pharmacist appears to be an adequate response to prevention of adverse drug event. This qualitative systematic review aims to identify and describe multidisciplinary planned team-based care involving at least one pharmacist to limit or prevent adverse drug events in the adult patients.

METHODS

To determine the type of interprofessional collaboration to prevent adverse drug event in which a pharmacist was involved, we conducted a qualitative systematic review of the literature of randomized controlled trials. Two independent reviewers screened trials in three databases: Medline, Web of Science, ScienceDirect. Prospective studies of at least three different health professionals' interventions, one of whom was a pharmacist in the last five years were included. Two reviewers performed data extraction and quality appraisal independently. We used TIDieR checklist to appraise articles quality.

RESULTS

In total 803 citations were retrieved, 34 were analysed and 16 full-text articles were reviewed. Only 3 studies published an implementation evaluation. More than half of the interventions (62%) targeted elderly patients including 6 whom lived in nursing homes. Studies outcomes were heterogeneous, and we did not perform a statistical analysis of the impact of these interventions. Most teams are composed of a physician/pharmacist/nurse trio (94%; 100%; 88%). Half of the teams were composed of the primary care physician. Other professionals were included such as physical therapists (25%), social worker (19%), occupational therapists (12%), and community health educator (6%). Multidisciplinary medication review was the most common intervention and was generally structured in four steps: data collection and baseline assessment, appraisal report by health professionals, a multidisciplinary medication review meeting and a patient follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common multidisciplinary intervention to prevent ADE in the adult population is the multidisciplinary drug review meeting at least the physician/pharmacist/nurse trio. Interventions target mostly elderly people in nursing homes, although complex chronic patients could benefit from this type of assessment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration: CRD42022334685.

The effects of pharmaceutical interventions on potentially inappropriate medications in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) is a particular concern in older patients and is associated with negative health outcomes. As various interventions have been developed to manage it, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of pharmaceutical interventions on outcomes of PIMs in older patients.

Methods

Meta-analysis of eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to report the outcomes of pharmaceutical interventions in older patients searching from the databases of Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov, SinoMed and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR). The PRISMA guidelines were followed and the protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019134754). Cochrane bias risk assessment tool and the modified Jadad scale were used to assess the risk bias. RevMan software was used for data processing, analysis and graphical plotting.

Results

Sixty-five thousand, nine hundred seventy-one patients in 14 RCTs were included. Of the primary outcomes, pharmaceutical interventions could significantly reduce the incidence of PIMs in older patients (OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.42, 0.62; p < 0.001), and the number of PIMs per person (MD = -0.41, 95%CI: -0.51, -0.31; p < 0.001), accompanying by a low heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis showed that the application of computer-based clinical decision support for pharmacological interventions could remarkably decrease the incidence of PIMs and two assessment tools were more effective. Of the secondary outcomes, the meta-analysis showed that pharmacological interventions could reduce the number of drugs used per person (MD = -0.94, 95%CI: -1.51, -0.36; p = 0.001) and 30-day readmission rate (OR = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.36, 0.92; p = 0.02), accompanying by a low heterogeneity. However, the pharmaceutical interventions demonstrated no significant improvement on all-cause mortality and the number of falls.

Conclusion

Our findings supported the efficacy of pharmaceutical interventions to optimize the use and management of drugs in older patients.

Systematic review registration

https://clinicaltrials.gov/, CRD42019134754.

STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate medications/potential prescribing omissions in older people: uptake and clinical impact

INTRODUCTION

STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs, STOPP) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs, START) have gained considerable interest and traction since they were first published in 2008. This review focuses on their uptake and impact in various clinical settings.

AREAS COVERED

STOPP/START criteria, now in their third iteration, are explicit criteria designed to facilitate detection of common and clinically important PIMs and PPOs during routine medication review in any clinical setting. We examine the influence of the criteria, particularly in clinical trials that focused on their impact on clinically relevant endpoints.

EXPERT OPINION

STOPP/START criteria are widely used in several countries within Europe and beyond for medication review and audit. As a discreet intervention, the criteria have been tested in several single-center and two large-scale multi-center clinical trials. The single-center trials indicate that STOPP/START criteria reduce polypharmacy, inappropriate prescribing, ADRs (adverse drug reactions), medication cost and falls. In contrast, the SENATOR and OPERAM multicentre trials did not demonstrate significant reduction in ADRs, all-cause mortality, drug-related hospital readmissions, nor any improvement in quality-of-life. Further clinical trials are required to examine whether STOPP/START criteria as an intervention can deliver significant clinical benefit in a reproducible manner in various clinical settings.

Community pharmacists' perceptions on multidisciplinary heart failure care: an exploratory qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is an important health problem and guidelines recommend multidisciplinary management. The pharmacist is an important member of the multidisciplinary heart failure team, both in the hospital and community setting. This study aims to explore the perceptions of community pharmacists on their role in HF care.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study based on face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 13 Belgian community pharmacists between September 2020 and December 2020. We used the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL) method as guidance for data analysis until data saturation was reached. We structured interview content into a thematic matrix.

RESULTS

We identified two major themes: heart failure management and multidisciplinary management. Pharmacists feel responsible for the pharmacological and non-pharmacological management of heart failure, citing easy access and pharmacological expertise as important assets. Diagnostic uncertainty, lack of knowledge and time, disease complexity and difficulties in communication with patients and informal care providers are barriers to optimal management. General practitioners are the most important partners in multidisciplinary community heart failure management, although pharmacists perceive a lack of appreciation and cooperation and deplore communication difficulties. They feel intrinsically motivated to provide extended pharmaceutical care in HF but cite the lack of financial viability and information sharing structures as important barriers.

CONCLUSION

The importance of pharmacist involvement in multidisciplinary heart failure teams is undisputed by Belgian pharmacists, who cite easy access and pharmacological expertise as important assets. They point out several barriers impeding evidence-based pharmacist care for outpatients with heart failure: diagnostic uncertainty and disease complexity, lack of multidisciplinary information technology and insufficient resources. We recommend that future policy should focus on improved medical data exchanges between primary and secondary care electronic health records as well as the reinforcement of interprofessional relationships between locally affiliated pharmacists and general practitioners.

Medication Decision-Making and the Medicines' Pathway in Nursing Homes: Experiences and Expectations of Involvement of Residents and Informal Caregivers

BACKGROUND

Information on how residents and their informal caregivers are involved in the medicines' pathway in nursing homes is scarce. Likewise, it is not known how they would prefer to be involved therein.

METHODS

A generic qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with 17 residents and 10 informal caregivers from four nursing homes was performed. Interview transcripts were analyzed using an inductive thematic framework.

RESULTS

Four themes were derived to describe resident and informal caregiver involvement in the medicines' pathway. First, residents and informal caregivers show behaviors of involvement across the medicines' pathway. Second, their attitude towards involvement was mainly one of resignation, but variation was noted in their involvement preferences, ranging from minimal information to active participation needs. Third, institutional and personal factors were found to contribute to the resigned attitude. Last, situations were identified that drive residents and informal caregivers to act, regardless of their resigned attitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Resident and informal caregiver involvement in the medicines' pathway is limited. Nevertheless, interviews show that information and participation needs are present and show potential for residents' and informal caregivers' contribution to the medicines' pathway. Future research should explore initiatives to increase the understanding and acknowledgement of opportunities for involvement and to empower residents and informal caregivers to take on their roles.

Potentially inappropriate medications in nursing homes and the community older adults using the French health insurance databases

PURPOSE

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) have become a major issue in improving prescribing practices and reducing the risk of adverse drug events in older people. However, very few studies have compared exposition to PIMs controlling for differences in demographic and health between nursing home residents (NHRs) and community-dwelling older adults (CDOAs). This study aimed to assess the prescribing pattern of PIMs between NHRs and CDOAs.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study over three months in 2019 using the French Health Insurance databases. The study population included 274 971 NHRs and 4 893 721 CDOAs aged 75 years or over. The prevalence ratio (PR) between NHRs and CDOAs of 17 PIM indicators, based on the Beers and STOPP criteria lists, was assessed using multivariable robust Poisson regression adjusted for age, sex, diseases, and polypharmacy.

RESULTS

During the study period, 54% of NHRs and 29% of CDOAs received at least one PIM. After adjustment, the prevalence of PIMs was 33% higher among NHRs compared to CDOAs (aPR = 1.33; 95% CI [1.33-1.34]). NHRs received PIMs related to benzodiazepines (aPR = 1.43; 95% CI [1.42-1.43]), anticholinergic drugs (aPR = 1.29; 95% CI [1.27-1.31]), and at least three central nervous system-active drugs (aPR = 1.94; 95% CI [1.92-1.96]) more frequently. Prevalence of PIMs related to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (aPR = 0.50; 95% CI [0.48-0.52]) and long-acting benzodiazepines (aPR = 0.84; 95% CI [0.82-0.85]) was lower among NHRs.

CONCLUSION

The NHRs were at greater risk for PIM than CDOAs, although differences exist according to the category of PIMs. As the population is aging, it is essential to promote and evaluate interventions in NHs and the community to enhance medication optimization.

Prevalence of Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions According to the New STOPP/START Criteria in Nursing Homes: A Systematic Review

The demand for long-term care is expected to increase due to the rising life expectancy and the increased prevalence of long-term illnesses. Nursing home residents are at an increased risk of suffering adverse drug events due to inadequate prescriptions. The main objective of this systematic review is to collect and analyze the prevalence of potentially inadequate prescriptions based on the new version of STOPP/START criteria in this specific population. Databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane) were searched for inappropriate prescription use in nursing homes according to the second version of STOPP/START criteria. The risk of bias was assessed with the STROBE checklist. A total of 35 articles were assessed for eligibility. One hundred and forty nursing homes and more than 6900 residents were evaluated through the analysis of 13 studies of the last eight years. The reviewed literature returned prevalence ranges between 67.8% and 87.7% according to the STOPP criteria, according to START criteria prevalence ranged from 39.5% to 99.7%. The main factors associated with the presence of inappropriate prescriptions were age, comorbidities, and polypharmacy. These data highlight that, although the STOPP/START criteria were initially developed for community-dwelling older adults, its use in nursing homes may be a starting point to help detect more efficiently inappropriate prescriptions in institutionalized patients. We hope that this review will help to draw attention to the need for medication monitoring systems in this vulnerable population.

Drug-drug interactions in nursing home residents: analysis from the COME-ON trial

BACKGROUND

as a result of the high prevalence of polypharmacy in nursing homes (NHs), nursing home residents (NHRs) are exposed to numerous drug-drug interactions (DDIs) that can lead to adverse drug effects, and increased morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

to evaluate (i) the prevalence of DDIs among NHRs and its evolution over time, and (ii) factors associated with a favourable evolution.

DESIGN

posthoc analysis of the COME-ON study, a cluster-randomised controlled trial aiming at reducing potentially inappropriate prescriptions in NHs, through the implementation of a complex intervention.

SETTING AND SUBJECTS

901 NHRs from 54 Belgian NHs.

METHODS

DDIs were identified using a validated list of 66 potentially clinically relevant DDIs in older adults. We defined a favourable evolution at 15 months as the resolution of at least one DDI present at baseline, without the introduction of any new DDI. Factors associated with a favourable evolution were analysed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

at baseline, 475 NHRs (52.7%) were exposed to at least 1 DDI and 225 NHRs (25.0%) to more than one DDI. Most common DDI was 'Concomitant use of at least three central nervous system active drugs'. At 15 months, we observed a 6.3% absolute decrease in DDI prevalence in intervention group, and a 1.0% absolute increase in control group. The intervention, older age and private NH ownership were significantly associated with a favourable DDI evolution.

CONCLUSION

a high prevalence of DDI in Belgian NHs was observed, but the COME-ON intervention was associated with a favourable evolution over time.

Resident and informal caregiver involvement in medication-related decision-making and the medicines' pathway in nursing homes: experiences and perceived opportunities of healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Person-centered care has been shown to be beneficial for nursing home residents. The know-how and attitude of healthcare professionals, however, can make its implementation difficult. Also, research on person-centered care with regard to medication decision-making and the medicines' pathway in nursing homes is lacking. This study aimed to provide an understanding of healthcare professionals' attitudes and perspectives on current resident and informal caregiver involvement in medication decision-making and the medicines' pathway in nursing homes.

METHODS

A qualitative, explorative study using semi-structured interviews with a sample of 25 healthcare professionals from four different nursing homes was performed. Interview transcripts were analyzed by means of an inductive thematic framework.

RESULTS

Three overarching domains were identified: 1) features of, 2) drivers and barriers for, and 3) perceived consequences of resident and informal caregiver involvement in medication decision-making and the medicines' pathway. Involvement was mainly initiated by residents and informal caregivers themselves, pointing towards information and participation needs among both groups. Nevertheless, actions of healthcare professionals towards resident and informal caregiver involvement were mainly reactive and fragmentary. Their actions were influenced by the perception of residents and informal caregivers' desire and capabilities to be involved, the perception of their own professional role, but also by organizational factors such as the nursing home's philosophy. Furthermore, organizational concerns tempered the motivation to provide residents and informal caregivers with more medication-related responsibilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Resident and informal caregiver involvement in medication decision-making and the medicines' pathway remains limited in nursing homes. Information and participation needs of residents and informal caregivers were not fully acknowledged by healthcare professionals. As such, we can conclude that there is a need for initiatives, both on an individual and on an organizational level, to create and improve awareness on opportunities to improve resident and informal caregiver involvement in medication decision-making and the medicines' pathway.

Effects of an interprofessional deprescribing intervention in Swiss nursing homes: the Individual Deprescribing Intervention (IDeI) randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) has been shown to be beneficial to nursing home (NH) residents' health. Medication reviews are the most widely studied deprescribing intervention; in a previous trial, we showed that another intervention, a deprescribing-focused interprofessional quality circle, can reduce the use of inappropriate medications at the NH level. However, this intervention cannot account for the variety of the residents' clinical situations. Therefore, we trialled a subsequent intervention in NH that enacted the quality circle intervention in the previous year.

METHODS

In 7 NHs, the most heavily medicated residents were recruited and randomised to receive usual care or the intervention. The intervention was a pharmacist-led, deprescribing-focused medication review, followed by the creation of an individualised treatment modification plan in collaboration with nurses and physicians. Intervention's effects were assessed after four months on the number and dose of PIMs used, quality of life, and safety outcomes (mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and use of physical restraints). Data were analysed using Poisson multivariate regression models.

RESULTS

Sixty-two NH residents participated, falling short of the expected 100 participants; 4 died before initial data collection. Participants used a very high number of drugs (median 15, inter-quartile range [12-19]) and PIMs (median 5, IQR [3-7]) at baseline. The intervention did not reduce the number of PIMs prescribed to the participants; however, it significantly decreased their dose (incidence rate ratio 0.763, CI95 [0.594; 0.979]), in particular for chronic drugs (IRR 0.716, CI95 [0.546; 0.938]). No adverse effects were seen on mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and restraints use, but, in the intervention group, three participants experienced adverse events that required the reintroduction of withdrawn treatments, and a decrease in quality of life is possible.

CONCLUSIONS

As it did not reach its recruitment target, this trial should be seen as exploratory. Results indicate that, following a NH-level deprescribing intervention, a resident-level intervention can further reduce some aspects of PIMs use. Great attention must be paid to residents' well-being when further developing such deprescribing interventions, as a possible reduction in quality of life was found in the intervention group, and some participants suffered adverse events following deprescribing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03688542, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03688542 ), registered on 31.08.2018.

Drug Safety for Nursing-Home Residents - Findings of a Pragmatic, Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Intervention Trial in 44 Nursing Homes

BACKGROUND

The safety of drug use by nursing-home residents can be impaired by polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), and neuroleptics, as well as by a lack of adequate interprofessional coordination in the nursing home. The goal of the HIOPP-3- iTBX Trial was to improve drug safety in nursing-home residents, including a reduction of PIM and/or neuroleptic use, by means of a complex interprofessional intervention.

METHODS

This cluster-randomized, controlled trial was performed in nursing homes in Germany. Residents over age 65 were included in the trial. The intervention was carried out over six months and consisted of four elements: a drug review by trained pharmacists, educational sessions for general practitioners and nurses, a drug safety toolbox, and change management seminars for members of the three participating professions. The nursing homes in the control group continued to provide usual care. The primary endpoint was the prescription of at least one PIM and/or at least two neuroleptic drugs simultaneously. The secondary endpoints were the incidence of falls and hospitalizations, quality of life, and health-care costs. This trial is registered in the German Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00013588).

RESULTS

44 nursing homes with 862 residents were randomized, 23 of them (with 452 residents) to the intervention group and 21 (with 410 residents) to the control group. 41% of all nursinghome residents initially took at least one PIM and/or at least two neuroleptic drugs simultaneously. Follow-up data (including, among other things, the current drug regimen) were obtained for 773 residents. The intention-to-treat analysis continued to show no difference between the intervention group and the control group with respect to the primary endpoint.

CONCLUSION

This trial of an intervention to improve drug safety in nursing homes led neither to reduced prescribing of PIM and/or neuroleptic drugs, nor to any improvement in the overall health status of the nursing-home residents.

Quality standards for safe medication in nursing homes: development through a multistep approach including a Delphi consensus study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to develop quality standards reflecting minimal requirements for safe medication processes in nursing homes.

DESIGN

In a first step, relevant key topics for safe medication processes were deducted from a systematic search for similar guidelines, prior work and discussions with experts. In a second step, the essential requirements for each key topic were specified and substantiated with a literature-based rationale. Subsequently, the requirements were evaluated with a piloted, two-round Delphi study.

SETTING

Nursing homes in Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

Interprofessional panel of 25 experts from science and practice.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Each requirement was rated for its relevance for a safer and resident-oriented medication on a 9-point Likert-Scale based on the RAND/UCLA method. The requirements were considered relevant if, in the second round, the median relevance rating was ≥7 and the proportion of ratings ≥7 was ≥80%.

RESULTS

Five key topics with a total of 87 requirements were elaborated and rated in the Delphi study. After the second round (response rate in both rounds 100%), 85 requirements fulfilled the predefined criteria and were therefore included in the final set of quality standards. The five key topics are: (I) 'The medication is reviewed regularly and in defined situations', (II) 'The medication is reviewed in a structured manner', (III) 'The medication is monitored in a structured manner', (IV) 'All healthcare professionals are committed to an optimal interprofessional collaboration' and (V) 'Residents are actively involved in medication process'.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed normative quality standards for a safer and resident-oriented medication in Swiss nursing homes. Altogether, 85 requirements define the medication processes and the behaviour of healthcare professionals. A rigorous implementation may support nursing homes in taking a step towards safer and resident-oriented medication.

The value of deprescribing in older adults with dementia: a narrative review

Introduction:Mitigating the burden of unnecessary polypharmacy or multiple medication use in people living with dementia has been recognized as a key priority internationally. One approach to reducing inappropriate polypharmacy is through medication withdrawal or deprescribing.Area covered:Non-systematic searches of key databases including PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were conducted from inception to 28 February 2021 for articles that assessed the safety and/or efficacy of deprescribing in older adults living with dementia. Personal reference libraries were also utilized. Information on current clinical trials was found in clinicaltrial.gov.Expert Opinion: There is limited direct evidence to inform deprescribing in older adults with dementia specifically. This review identified nineteen studies that have assessed the impact of deprescribing interventions to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy or direct deprescribing of specific medications. However, the current evidence is limited in scope as most studies focused on medication-related outcomes (e.g. discontinuation of high-risk medications) rather than patient-centered outcomes in individuals living with dementia. Furthermore, most studies focused on addressing inappropriate polypharmacy in older adults with dementia living in long-term care facilities, and interventions did not involve the person and their carer. Further evidence on the impact of deprescribing in this population across clinical settings is needed.

[Multidisciplinar revision of treatment in nursing home patients in COVID-19 context]

Objetivo

Durante la pandemia por COVID-19 se contó con un médico de apoyo a los centros sociosanitarios de nuestra Comunidad Autónoma, lo que permitió realizar una intervención multidisciplinar para revisar sistemáticamente la medicación prescrita a las personas institucionalizadas; el objetivo de este estudio es evaluar el impacto de esta intervención en la reducción del número de fármacos/paciente.

Métodos

Estudio multicéntrico prospectivo antes-después de una intervención en la que participan médicos y farmacéuticos de atención primaria en 4 centros sociosanitarios de menos de 50 residentes. Se realizó una revisión sistemática de la medicación a través de un algoritmo, donde se identificaron problemas relacionados con los medicamentos (PRM), los cuales fueron comunicados al médico por el farmacéutico de atención primaria a través de recomendaciones en la prescripción. Se midió el grado de aceptación por el médico de dichas recomendaciones.

Resultados

Se revisaron 121 pacientes con una edad media de 86,1 años (DE 7,2); el 87,6% eran mujeres. De estos, se pudo realizar la intervención en 98 pacientes que tomaban una media de 9,4 fármacos (DE 4,0), con una disminución estadísticamente significativa de -1,6 fármacos (IC95% -1,3 a -1,9) p< 0,001 después de la intervención. En estos, se detectaron 409 PRM, con una media de 4,2 PRM por paciente. Todos los PRM formaron parte de una recomendación, de las cuales fueron aceptadas 316 (77,3%). La mayoría de las recomendaciones fueron de prescripción o ajuste en la posología de un medicamento. Los psicofármacos, antihipertensivos y analgésicos fueron los grupos terapéuticos mayoritariamente implicados en los PRM detectados.

Conclusiones

Se ha observado una reducción estadísticamente significativa en el número medio de fármacos por paciente tras la intervención. Se han identificado PRM a través de la revisión sistemática de la medicación por el farmacéutico de atención primaria que han sido mayoritariamente aceptados por el médico.

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.

Effects of an interprofessional Quality Circle-Deprescribing Module (QC-DeMo) in Swiss nursing homes: a randomised controlled trial

Background

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are common among nursing homes (NH) residents, as is polypharmacy. Deprescribing has emerged in the past decade as a safe and effective way to reduce the use of PIMs and improve patient outcomes. However, effective deprescribing interventions are expensive, as they require specialised staff and a great amount of time for each resident.

The Quality Circle Deprescribing Module (QC-DeMo) intervention was designed to be less resource-intensive than medication reviews, the current deprescribing gold standard. It consists of a QC session in which physicians, nurses, and pharmacists define a local deprescribing consensus for specific PIMs classes, which is then implemented in the NH. The intervention was trialled in a RCT, with the NH as unit of analysis.

Methods

After randomisation, intervention NHs enacted the QC-DeMo at the start of the follow-up year. The primary outcomes were the proportion of PIM galenic units and number of PIM defined daily dose per average resident and per day (DDD/res). PIM status was assessed by a combination of the 2015 Beers list and the Norwegian General Practice-Nursing Home criteria. Secondary outcomes were the number of DDD/res to avoid and to reevaluate; safety outcomes were mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and use of physical restraints. Outcomes were evaluated at follow-up using linear regression models, adjusting for the outcome baseline values.

Results

Fifty-eight NHs took part in the trial; no individual residents were recruited. The intervention did not reduce the primary outcomes, but a strong trend towards reduction was seen for the number of PIM DDD/res, which accounts for the doses used. PIM DDD/res to reevaluate were significantly reduced, mostly through a reduction in the use of proton-pump inhibitors. Falls and use of physical restraints were not affected, but a statistical interaction between the mission of the NH (geriatric unit or specialised dementia unit) and the intervention group was seen for mortality and hospitalisations.

Conclusions

The QC-DeMo intervention can reduce the use of some PIM classes, and could usefully complement other deprescribing interventions.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03688542), registered on 26.09.2018, retrospectively registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02220-y.

Efficacy, feasibility and acceptability of the OptiMEDs tool for multidisciplinary medication review in nursing homes

AIM(S)

Exploring efficacy, feasibility and acceptability of a complex multifaced intervention (OptiMEDs) supporting multidisciplinary medication reviews in Belgian nursing homes (NHs).

METHODS

A pilot study in 2 intervention, 1 control NH was held, involving dementia and non-dementia NH residents (>65 years). OptiMEDs provided automated assessment of possible inappropriate medications (PIMs) and patient-specific nurse observation lists of potential side-effects. Medication changes were evaluated one month after the medication review. Feasibility and acceptability was collected via surveys among the health-care professionals. Trial registration NCT04142645, 31/10/2019.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 148, n = 100 in the intervention NHs) had a mean age of 87.2 years, with 75.0% females and 49.3% non-dementia patients. Prevalence of PIM use was 84.7% and of potential medication side-effects 84.5%, (range 1-19 per resident). One month after the intervention, the medication use decreased in 35.8% and PIM use in 25.9% of surviving intervention NHresidents (n = 88). GPs changed more medications when side-effects were observed (42% when side-effects present versus 12% when no side-effects, p = 0.019). Median workload for nurses was 45 min, 20 for pharmacists, and 8 for GPs. User satisfaction for the OptiMEDs tool was high (n = 33, median score of 8, IQR 6 -8), with GPs (n = 19) showing the highest appreciation. Nurses (n = 9) reported a median score on the System Usability Scale of 70 (IQR 55 - 72), with lower scores for learnability aspects.

CONCLUSION

The OptiMEDs intervention was feasible and user-friendly, showing decreases in the medication and PIM use; without affecting patient safety. A cluster-randomized trial is needed to explore impact on patient-related outcomes.

Underprescription of medications in older adults: causes, consequences and solutions-a narrative review

PURPOSE

Under-prescription is defined as the omission of a medication that is indicated for the treatment of a condition or a disease, without any valid reason for not prescribing it. The aim of this review is to provide an updated overview of under-prescription, summarizing the available evidence concerning its prevalence, causes, consequences and potential interventions to reduce it.

METHODS

A PubMed search was performed, using the following keywords: under-prescription; under-treatment; prescribing omission; older adults; polypharmacy; cardiovascular drugs; osteoporosis; anticoagulant. The list of articles was evaluated by two authors who selected the most relevant of them. The reference lists of retrieved articles were screened for additional pertinent studies.

RESULTS

Although several pharmacological therapies are safe and effective in older patients, under-prescription remains widespread in the older population, with a prevalence ranging from 22 to 70%. Several drugs are underused, including cardiovascular, oral anticoagulant and anti-osteoporotic drugs. Many factors are associated with under-prescription, e.g. multi-morbidity, polypharmacy, dementia, frailty, risk of adverse drug events, absence of specific clinical trials in older patients and economic factors. Under-prescription is associated with negative consequences, such as higher risk of cardiovascular events, worsening disability, hospitalization and death. The implementation of explicit criteria for under-prescription, the use of the comprehensive geriatric assessment by geriatricians, and the involvement of a clinical pharmacist seem to be promising options to reduce under-prescription.

CONCLUSION

Under-prescription remains widespread in the older population. Further studies should be performed, to provide a better comprehension of this phenomenon and to confirm the efficacy of corrective interventions.

Use and Deprescribing of Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Frail Nursing Home Residents

BACKGROUND

The STOPPFrail criteria were developed to assist physicians in deprescribing medications among frail patients approaching end of life. We aimed to measure the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and to describe changes over time, using STOPPFrail, in frail nursing home residents (NHRs) with limited life expectancy included in a medication review trial.

METHODS

We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the COME-ON study, a cluster-controlled trial that evaluated the effect of a complex intervention on appropriateness of prescribing in Belgian nursing homes. We identified NHRs eligible for the application of STOPPFrail based on functional status, comorbidities, level of care and survival. PIM use was measured at baseline and at 8 months. Changes over time were compared in the control group (CG) and intervention group (IG).

RESULTS

At baseline, 308 NHRs met the STOPPFrail eligibility criteria, of whom 196 (64.1%) had one or more PIM. At 8 months, among the 218 NHRs who were alive, there was an absolute reduction in the prevalence of PIMs of 9.1% in the CG (p < 0.05) and 10.2% in the IG (p < 0.05). We found large reductions for some medications (e.g. proton pump inhibitors) but no reduction for others (e.g. calcium). The percentage of NHRs with one or more PIM discontinued without a new PIM initiated was higher in the IG than the CG but the difference was not significant (35.1% vs 23.6%, p = 0.127).

CONCLUSION

Among frail NHRs with poor survival prognosis, a significant and encouraging decrease in PIM prevalence over time was observed, probably facilitated by medication reviews. The overall prevalence of PIMs remained high, however.

Benzodiazepine Use and Deprescribing in Belgian Nursing Homes: Results from the COME-ON Study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

To describe the use and deprescribing of benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRAs) among nursing home residents (NHRs), to evaluate appropriateness of use and to identify factors associated with BZRA use and deprescribing.

DESIGN

Posthoc analysis of the Collaborative Approach to Optimize Medication Use for Older People in Nursing Homes (COME-ON) study, a cluster controlled trial that evaluated the impact of a complex intervention on potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) in nursing homes (NHs).

SETTING

A total of 54 NHs in Belgium.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 797 NHRs included in the study who had complete medical, clinical, and medication information at baseline and at the end of the study (month 15).

MEASUREMENTS

Data were recorded by participating healthcare professionals. Reasons why BZRA use was considered as PIPs were assessed using the 2019 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria® and the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria, version 2. Deprescribing included complete cessation or decreased daily dose. We identified factors at the NHR, prescriber, and NH levels associated with BZRA use and BZRA deprescribing using multivariable binary and multinomial logistic regression, respectively.

RESULTS

At baseline, 418 (52.4%) NHRs were taking a BZRA. The use of BZRA for longer than 4 weeks, with two or more other central nervous system active drugs, and in patients with delirium, cognitive impairment, falls, or fractures was found in more than 67% of BZRA users. Eight NHR-related variables and two prescriber-related variables were associated with regular BZRA use. Deprescribing occurred in 28.1% of BZRA users (32.9% in the intervention group and 22.1% in the control group). In addition to four other factors, dementia (odds ratio [OR] = 2.35; 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.45-3.83]) and intervention group (OR = 1.74; 95% CI = 1.07-2.87) were associated with deprescribing.

CONCLUSION

Use of BZRAs was highly prevalent, and reasons to consider it as PIP were frequent. Deprescribing occurred in one-fourth of NHRs, which is encouraging. Future interventions should focus on specific aspects of PIPs (ie, indication, duration, drug-drug and drug-disease interactions) as well as on nondementia patients.

Process evaluation of a complex intervention to optimize quality of prescribing in nursing homes (COME-ON study)

Background

The COME-ON study was a cluster-controlled trial of a complex intervention that consisted of a blended training program, local interdisciplinary meetings, and interdisciplinary case conferences in Belgian nursing homes. The intervention was associated with significant improvements in the appropriateness of prescribing. The aims of this study were to describe the implementation of the intervention and to explore the experiences of participants, for the purpose of identifying factors associated with implementation and perceived impact and to draw lessons for future implementation.

Methods

We performed a mixed-method process evaluation. Questionnaires and reports were used to collect quantitative data on implementation and experiences from the 24 NHs and participating healthcare professionals (coordinating physicians, general practitioners, pharmacists, and nurses) in the intervention group. Multidisciplinary focus groups focusing on factors associated with implementation and perceived impact were conducted in 11 NHs.

Results

Overall, the rate of implementation and the satisfaction of participants were good, despite some variability between NHs and HCPs. Although perceived impact on nursing home residents varied, most participants perceived a positive impact for themselves. Factors associated with implementation and perceived impact were identified at different levels: intervention, healthcare professionals, organization, and external context. The interdisciplinary and face-to-face approaches were recognized as key elements for the success of the intervention, despite organizational constraints. The attitude of general practitioners was identified both as a barrier to and a facilitator for implementation and its success. The professional role and competency of the pharmacist influenced perceived impact. The pre-existing relationships between HCPs and the presence of a leader facilitated implementation and perceived impact. Remuneration was deemed necessary for the study and for future implementation.

Conclusions

Overall, the intervention, and more specifically its interdisciplinary aspect, was well implemented and appreciated by HCPs. This probably contributed to the positive effect on the appropriateness of prescribing. Future implementation must take into account the various factors found to affect implementation and perceived impact, in order to maximize effect and sustainability.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN66138978; registered 18 November 2015, retrospectively registered, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN66138978