Polimedication: applicability of a computer tool to reduce polypharmacy in nursing homes

Adverse Drug Reactions Resulting From the Use of Chiral Medicines Amoxicillin, Amoxicillin-Clavulanic Acid, and Ceftriaxone: A Mixed Prospective-Retrospective Cohort Study

The use of chiral medicines (possessing center(s) of asymmetric carbon) may cause adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The safety assurance of these medicines is critical. We aimed to evaluate registered and commonly used anti-infective chiral medicines circulating in the Tanzanian market to establish their safety profile to protect public health. A mixed prospective-retrospective cohort study was conducted to assess the safety profile of amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and ceftriaxone injection. ADRs causality assessment was conducted by using World Health Organization (WHO)-Algorithm criteria. Data were collected from 7 tertiary hospitals: Muhimbili National Hospital (MNH), Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre (KCMC), Bugando Medical Centre (BMC), Ligula Referral-Regional Hospital (LRRH), Kitete Referral-Regional Hospital (KRRH), Dodoma Referral-Regional Hospital (DRRH), and Mbeya Zonal-Referral Hospital (MZRH). Data were supplemented by those recorded in the WHO-Vigiflow/VigiLyze database within the same monitoring period. Data were analyzed using STATA version-15. The results were considered statistically significant when P < .05. A total of 2522 patients were enrolled in hospitals: MNH (499), KCMC (407), BMC (396), LRRH (387), KRRH (345), DRRH (249), and MZRH (239). Among those, 1197 (47.5%) were treated with ceftriaxone, 585 (23.2%) amoxicillin and 740(29.3%) amoxicillin-clavulanic acid. Out of those, 102 (4.5%) experienced adverse events (AEs), 49 (48%) were due to ceftriaxone, 37 (36.3%) amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and 16 (15.7%) amoxicillin (P-value .012). A total of 443 participants from the enrolled and WHO-Vigiflow/VigiLyze database were experienced with ADRs. The ADRs affected mainly gastro-intestinal system 234 (53%), skin and subcutaneous tissue 85 (19%), nervous system 49 (11%), respiratory thoracic 22 (5%), and general disorders 18(4%). In this study, approximately 90% of reported AEs were ADRs possible-related to the monitored medicines, with few plausible and certain. Ceftriaxone injection caused more ADRs. Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid was associated with more ADRs than amoxicillin alone. The safety profile of these medicines is still maintained; however, comprehensive monitoring of ADRs is recommended to improve patient safety and enhance overall treatment outcomes.

Polypharmacy and precision medicine

Precision medicine is an approach to maximise the effectiveness of disease treatment and prevention and minimise harm from medications by considering relevant demographic, clinical, genomic and environmental factors in making treatment decisions. Precision medicine is complex, even for decisions about single drugs for single diseases, as it requires expert consideration of multiple measurable factors that affect pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and many patient-specific variables. Given the increasing number of patients with multiple conditions and medications, there is a need to apply lessons learned from precision medicine in monotherapy and single disease management to optimise polypharmacy. However, precision medicine for optimisation of polypharmacy is particularly challenging because of the vast number of interacting factors that influence drug use and response. In this narrative review, we aim to provide and apply the latest research findings to achieve precision medicine in the context of polypharmacy. Specifically, this review aims to (1) summarise challenges in achieving precision medicine specific to polypharmacy; (2) synthesise the current approaches to precision medicine in polypharmacy; (3) provide a summary of the literature in the field of prediction of unknown drug-drug interactions (DDI) and (4) propose a novel approach to provide precision medicine for patients with polypharmacy. For our proposed model to be implemented in routine clinical practice, a comprehensive intervention bundle needs to be integrated into the electronic medical record using bioinformatic approaches on a wide range of data to predict the effects of polypharmacy regimens on an individual. In addition, clinicians need to be trained to interpret the results of data from sources including pharmacogenomic testing, DDI prediction and physiological-pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling to inform their medication reviews. Future studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this model and to test generalisability so that it can be implemented at scale, aiming to improve outcomes in people with polypharmacy.

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.

Decision-support systems for managing polypharmacy in the elderly: A scoping review

Polypharmacy, the consuming of more than five drugs, is a public health problem. It can lead to many interactions and adverse drug reactions and is very expensive. Therapeutic guidelines for managing polypharmacy in the elderly have been issued, but are highly complex, limiting their use. Decision-support systems have therefore been developed to automate the execution of these guidelines, or to provide information about drugs adapted to the context of polypharmacy. These systems differ widely in terms of their technical design, knowledge sources and evaluation methods. We present here a scoping review of electronic systems for supporting the management, by healthcare providers, of polypharmacy in elderly patients. Most existing reviews have focused mainly on evaluation results, whereas the present review also describes the technical design of these systems and the methodologies for developing and evaluating them. A systematic bibliographic search identified 19 systems differing considerably in terms of their technical design (rule-based systems, documentary approach, mixed); outputs (textual report, alerts and/or visual approaches); and evaluations (impact on clinical practices, impact on patient outcomes, efficiency and/or user satisfaction). The evaluations performed are minimal (among all the systems identified, only one system has been evaluated according to all the criteria mentioned above) and no machine learning systems and/or conflict management systems were retrieved. This review highlights the need to develop new methodologies, combining various approaches for decision support system in polypharmacy.

Clinical validation of clinical decision support systems for medication review: A scoping review

The aim of this scoping review is to summarize approaches and outcomes of clinical validation studies of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) to support (part of) a medication review. A literature search was conducted in Embase and Medline. In total, 30 articles validating a CDSS were ultimately included. Most of the studies focused on detection of adverse drug events, potentially inappropriate medications and drug‐related problems. We categorized the included articles in three groups: studies subjectively reviewing the clinical relevance of CDSS's output (21/30 studies) resulting in a positive predictive value (PPV) for clinical relevance of 4–80%; studies determining the relationship between alerts and actual events (10/30 studies) resulting in a PPV for actual events of 5–80%; and studies comparing output of CDSSs to chart/medication reviews in the whole study population (10/30 studies) resulting in a sensitivity of 28–85% and specificity of 42–75%. We found heterogeneity in the methods used and in the outcome measures. The validation studies did not report the use of a published CDSS validation strategy. To improve the effectiveness and uptake of CDSSs supporting a medication review, future research would benefit from a more systematic and comprehensive validation strategy.

STOPP/START interventions to improve medicines management for people aged 65 years and over: a realist synthesis

Background

Drug-related problems and potentially inappropriate prescribing impose a huge burden on patients and the health-care system. The most widely used tools for appropriate prescription in older adults in England and in other European countries are the Screening Tool of Older People’s Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to the Right Treatment (START) tools. STOPP/START tools support medicines optimisation for older adults.

Objectives

To identify, test and refine the programme theories underlying how interventions based on the STOPP/START tools are intended to work, for whom, in what circumstances and why, as well as the resource use and cost requirements or impacts.

Design

A realist synthesis.

Setting

Primary care, hospital care and nursing homes.

Patients

Patients aged ≥ 65 years.

Interventions

Any intervention based on the use of the STOPP/START tools.

Review methods

Database and web-searching was carried out to retrieve relevant evidence to identify and test programme theories about how interventions based on the use of the STOPP/START tools work. A project reference group made up of health-care professionals, NHS decision-makers, older people, carers and members of the public was set up. In phase 1 we identified programme theories about STOPP/START interventions on how, for whom, in what contexts and why they are intended to work. We searched the peer-reviewed and grey literature to identify documents relevant to the research questions. We interviewed experts in the field in our reference group to gain input on our list of candidate context–mechanism–outcome configurations, to identify additional context–mechanism–outcome configurations and to identify additional literature and/or relevant concepts. In phase 2 we reviewed and synthesised relevant published and unpublished empirical evidence and tested the programme theories using evidence from a larger set of empirical studies.

Results

We developed a single logic model structured around three key mechanisms: (1) personalisation, (2) systematisation and (3) evidence implementation. Personalisation: STOPP/START-based interventions are based on shared decision-making, taking into account patient preferences, experiences and expectations (mechanisms), leading to increased patient awareness, adherence, satisfaction, empowerment and quality of life (outcomes). Systematisation: STOPP/START tools provide a standardised/systematic approach for medication reviews (mechanisms), leading to changes in professional and organisational culture and burden/costs (outcomes). Evidence implementation: delivery of STOPP/START-based interventions is based on the implementation of best evidence (mechanisms), reducing adverse outcomes through appropriate prescribing/deprescribing (outcomes). For theory testing, we identified 40 studies of the impact of STOPP/START-based interventions in hospital settings, nursing homes, primary care and community pharmacies. Most of the interventions used multiple mechanisms. We found support for the impact of the personalisation and evidence implementation mechanisms on selected outcome variables, but similar impact was achieved by interventions not relying on these mechanisms. We also observed that the impact of interventions was linked to the proximity of the selected outcomes to the intervention in the logic model, resulting in a clearer benefit for appropriateness of prescribing, adverse drug events and prescription costs.

Limitations

None of the available studies had been explicitly designed for evaluating underlying causal mechanisms, and qualitative information was sparse.

Conclusions

No particular configuration of the interventions is associated with a greater likelihood of improved outcomes in given settings.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018110795.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 23. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Pharmacological Interactions of Nintedanib and Pirfenidone in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in Times of COVID-19 Pandemic

The discovery of antifibrotic agents have resulted in advances in the therapeutic management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Currently, nintedanib and pirfenidone have become the basis of IPF therapy based on the results of large randomized clinical trials showing their safety and efficacy in reducing disease advancement. However, the goal of completely halting disease progress has not been reached yet. Administering nintedanib with add-on pirfenidone is supposed to enhance the therapeutic benefit by simultaneously acting on two different pathogenic pathways. All this becomes more important in the context of the ongoing global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) because of the fibrotic consequences following SARS-CoV-2 infection in some patients. However, little information is available about their drug–drug interaction, which is important mainly in polymedicated patients. The aim of this review is to describe the current management of progressive fibrosing interstitial lung diseases (PF-ILDs) in general and of IPF in particular, focusing on the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions between these two drugs and their relationship with other medications in patients with IPF.

Prescription of Potentially Inappropriate Medication in Older Inpatients of an Internal Medicine Ward: Concordance and Overlap Among the EU(7)-PIM List and Beers and STOPP Criteria

Background: Age-related comorbidities prone older adults to polypharmacy and to an increased risk of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use. This work aims to analyze the concordance and overlap among the EU(7)-PIM list, 2019 Beers criteria, and Screening Tool of Older Person’s Prescriptions (STOPP) version 2 criteria and also to analyze the prevalence of PIM.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on older inpatients of an internal medicine ward. Demographic, clinical, and pharmacological data were collected, during March 2020. After PIM identification by the EU(7)-PIM list, Beers criteria, and STOPP v2 criteria, the concordance and overlap between criteria were analyzed. A descriptive analysis was performed, and all the results with a p-value lower than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results: A total of 616 older patients were included in the study whose median age was 85 (Q1–Q3) (78–89) years. Most of the older patients were male (51.6%), and the median (Q1–Q3) number of days of hospitalization was 17 (13–22) days. According to the EU(7)-PIM list, Beers criteria, and STOPP criteria, 79.7, 92.0, and 76.5% of older adults, respectively, used at least one PIM. A poor concordance (<63.4%) among criteria was observed. An association between PIM and the number of prescribed medicines was found in all applied criteria. Moreover, an association between the number of PIMs and diagnoses of endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic diseases, mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders, and circulatory system diseases and days of hospitalization was observed according to Beers criteria, and that with diseases of the circulatory system and musculoskeletal system and connective tissue was observed according to STOPP criteria.

Conclusion: Despite the poor concordance between the EU(7)-PIM list, 2019 Beers, and STOPP v2 criteria, this work highlights the need for more studies in inpatients to develop strategies to facilitate the identification of PIM to decrease the high prevalence of PIM in hospitalized patients. The poor concordance among criteria also highlights the need to develop new tools adapting the existing criteria to medical ward inpatients.

A survey on what pharmacists and physicians caring for nursing home residents expect of user-friendly lists of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP lists)

INTRODUCTION

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP, including potentially inappropriate medication, PIM) is frequent. In research and practice, the use of PIP lists could optimize a patient's medication. However, they are barely used, possibly because of their limited user-friendliness. This study aimed at evaluating the opinions of pharmacists and physicians caring for nursing home residents on user-friendliness as well as knowledge and current use of PIP lists.

METHODS

Semi-structured telephone interviews and paper-based surveys were conducted with physicians and pharmacists who care for nursing home residents. Descriptive analysis and Fisher's exact test were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 30 practitioners participated in the survey, eight of whom were interviewed by phone. 43 % (13/30) of the participants had already heard of PIP lists, and 46 % (6/13) of them made use of a PIP list. Less experienced professionals had more often heard of PIP lists than more experienced ones. The most important aspects of user-friendliness were: time required to use the list, electronic availability, clear structure and provision of reasons why a medication is potentially inappropriate. Physicians preferred a PIP list adapted to the Swiss drug market more often than pharmacists.

DISCUSSION

Knowledge and current use of PIP lists are limited, which is partially consistent with the results of other studies. Participants with less professional experience have heard of PIP lists more frequently, opinions on user-friendliness differ between professions, and preferences seem to be, overall, highly individual.

CONCLUSION

In order for PIP lists to be used more frequently, the aspects of user-friendliness should be taken into account. Personalizable PIP lists could be an interesting development.

Computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations for hospitalised older adults: evaluation of the relationship between clinical relevance and rate of implementation in the SENATOR trial

BACKGROUND

findings from a recent qualitative study indicate that the perceived clinical relevance of computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations was a key factor affecting their implementation by physician prescribers caring for hospitalised older adults in the SENATOR trial.

AIM

to systematically evaluate the clinical relevance of these recommendations and to establish if clinical relevance significantly affected the implementation rate.

METHODS

a pharmacist-physician pair retrospectively reviewed the case records for all SENATOR trial intervention patients at Cork University Hospital and assigned a degree of clinical relevance for each STOPP/START recommendation based on a previously validated six-point scale. The chi-square test was used to quantify the differences in prescriber implementation rates between recommendations of varying clinical relevance, with statistical significance set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

in 204 intervention patients, the SENATOR software produced 925 STOPP/START recommendations. Nearly three quarters of recommendations were judged to be clinically relevant (73.6%); however, nearly half of these were deemed of 'possibly low relevance' (320/681; 47%). Recommendations deemed of higher clinical relevance were significantly more likely to be implemented than those of lower clinical relevance (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

a large proportion (61%) of the computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations provided were of potential 'adverse significance', of 'no clinical relevance' or of 'possibly low relevance'. The adjudicated clinical relevance of computer-generated medication recommendations significantly affects their implementation. Meticulous software refinement is required for future interventions of this type to increase the proportion of recommendations that are of high clinical relevance. This should facilitate their implementation, resulting in prescribing optimisation and improved clinical outcomes for multimorbid older adults.