Increasing prescriber awareness of drug interactions in palliative care

Analysis of drug interactions at the end of life

BACKGROUND

As death approaches, patients are at their most frail, but an increasing symptom burden often necessitates an increase in medications, putting them at higher risk for drug-drug interactions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the potential for drug-drug interactions in routine prescribing at the end of life.

METHODS

An Australian retrospective multicentre case-note review of 266 consecutive adult patients who were referred to specialist palliative care, with data available on 166. Medications used in the last 2 weeks of life were screened for potential interactions using the 'Stockley's Drug Interactions' software.

RESULTS

The mean number of medications prescribed was 10.8, median 9 (IQR 6-14); all patients received at least one medication. In this study, 72% of patients were at risk of 1 or more potential drug-drug interaction. The mean number of potential interactions was 4.4, with a median of 2.5 (IQR 0-7) per patient. There were only 4/166 (2.4%) prescribed medications with an associated clinical record of an adverse drug reaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Potential drug-drug interactions are common for this group of patients. Some interactions may be recognised as an acceptable risk when the prescription is written. Further research is necessary to determine the best way to improve recognition of potential drug-drug interactions and the rates of morbidity or accelerated mortality associated with this. It is likely that palliative care services will need to implement multiple strategies including greater use of computerised prescribing software, and greater closer liaison with clinical pharmacists.

Piloting the role of a pharmacist in a community palliative care multidisciplinary team: an Australian experience

BACKGROUND

While the home is the most common setting for the provision of palliative care in Australia, a common problem encountered here is the inability of patient/carers to manage medications, which can lead to misadventure and hospitalisation. This can be averted through detection and resolution of drug related problems (DRPs) by a pharmacist; however, they are rarely included as members of the palliative care team. The aim of this study was to pilot a model of care that supports the role of a pharmacist in a community palliative care team. A component of the study was to develop a cost-effective model for continuing the inclusion of a pharmacist within a community palliative care service.

METHODS

The study was undertaken (February March 2009-June 2010) in three phases. Development (Phase 1) involved a literature review; scoping the pharmacist's role; creating tools for recording DRPs and interventions, a communication and education strategy, a care pathway and evidence based patient information. These were then implemented in Phase 2. Evaluation (Phase 3) of the impact of the pharmacist's role from the perspectives of team members was undertaken using an online survey and focus group. Impact on clinical outcomes was determined by the number of patients screened to assess their risk of medication misadventure, as well as the number of medication reviews and interventions performed to resolve DRPs.

RESULTS

The pharmacist screened most patients (88.4%, 373/422) referred to the palliative care service to assess their risk of medication misadventure, and undertook 52 home visits. Medication reviews were commonly conducted at the majority of home visits (88%, 46/52), and a variety of DRPs (113) were detected at this point, the most common being "patient requests drug information" (25%, 28/113) and "condition not adequately treated" (22%, 25/113). The pharmacist made 120 recommendations in relation to her interventions.Fifty percent of online survey respondents (10/20) had interacted 10 or more times with the pharmacist for advice. All felt that the pharmacist's role was helpful, improving their knowledge of the different medications used in palliative care. The six team members who participated in the focus group indicated that there were several benefits of the pharmacist's contributions towards medication screening and review.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of a pharmacist in a community palliative care team lead to an increase in the medication-related knowledge and skills of its members, improved patients' medication management, and minimised related errors. The model of care created can potentially be duplicated by other palliative care services, although its cost-effectiveness was unable to be accurately tested within the study.

Adverse events in hospice and palliative care: a pilot study to determine feasibility of collection and baseline rates

BACKGROUND

Continuous quality improvement is fundamental in all health care, including hospice and palliative care. Identifying and systematically reducing symptomatic adverse events is limited in hospice and palliative care because these events are mostly attributed to disease progression.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of symptomatic adverse events in hospice and palliative care and assessing their incidence.

METHODS

A retrospective, consecutive cohort of notes from a specialist palliative care inpatient service was surveyed by a clinical nurse consultant for symptomatic adverse events: falls, confusion, decreased consciousness, hypo- and hyperglycaemia, urinary retention, and hypotension. Demographic and clinical factors were explored for people at higher risk.

RESULTS

Data were available on the most recent admissions of 65 people, generating >900 inpatient days. Fifty people (78%) had events precipitating admission, of whom 31 (62%) had at least one further event during admission. Eleven of 15 people who were admitted without an event experienced at least one during their admissions. Only 4 did not have an adverse event. During their stay, there were 0.13 (standard deviation [SD] = 0.19) events per patient per day. No drug-drug or drug-host events were noted. No clinical or demographic factors predicted groups at higher risk.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot highlights the feasibility of collecting, and ubiquity of, symptomatic adverse events, and forms a baseline against which future interventions to decrease the frequency or intensity can be measured. Given the frailty of hospice and palliative patients, any adverse event is likely to accelerate irreversibly their systemic decline.

Prescribing in palliative care as death approaches

OBJECTIVES

To determine how prescribing for comorbid illnesses and symptom control changes during the palliative phase of a terminal illness.

DESIGN

This prospective cohort study explores the relative contribution to prescribing of symptom-specific medications (SSMs) and long-term medications for comorbid medical conditions.

SETTING

Regional consultative palliative care program, Adelaide, South Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred sixty consecutive patients, 96% of whom had cancer, who enrolled and subsequently died in a larger randomized trial exploring palliative service delivery.

MEASUREMENTS

Medication and performance data were collected monthly from referral until death (mean 107 days, median 93 days, standard deviation (SD) 103 days, range 11-752 days). Prespecified subgroup analyses of age, performance status, and the baseline use of medications for comorbid medical conditions were performed.

RESULTS

At baseline, the mean total number of medications+/-SD was 4.9+/-2.8 (range 0-16), SSMs was 2.3+/-1.5 (range 0-7), and medications for comorbid medical conditions was 2.6+/-2.4 (range 0-13). As death approached, the total number of medications increased because of SSM prescribing (2.5 more medications, 95% confidence interval (CI)=2.2-2.9; P<.001) with a decrease in medications for comorbid medical conditions (1.1 fewer medications, 95% CI=0.8-1.3; P<.001). There was an increase in the number of medications meeting Beers' criteria for high-risk inappropriate medication use for SSMs (29% to 48%). More SSMs were prescribed in people with better performance status, and older participants took more medications for comorbid medical conditions.

CONCLUSION

Prescribing changes as life-limiting illnesses progress, with older people taking more medications. Medications for comorbid medical conditions should be reviewed in the context of their original therapeutic goals.