Does pharmacist-led medication review help to reduce hospital admissions and deaths in older people? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cost savings from medication reviews in community pharmacies for nursing home residents in Estonia: a case study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to assess the cost savings from medication reviews conducted for individuals living in nursing homes in Estonia. Medication reviews performed as part of the automated dose dispensing (ADD) service by community pharmacies might help identify suboptimal medicine regimens.

METHODS

We use a case study approach to identify suboptimal use of medication in treatment plans and estimate the potential cost saving from medication reviews. To achieve this, we assess 101 treatment plans submitted for medication review by nursing homes in Estonia between 2021 and 2023. Additionally, we run OLS regressions to identify the most important determinants of medication cost savings.

RESULTS

We estimate an average direct cost saving of €43.62 per patient per year, which corresponds to 8.27% of the average annual medication costs. If medication reviews were conducted for all elderly individuals over 75 years old who use six or more prescription medicines, nearly 2% of Estonia's pharmaceutical budget could be saved. Regression analysis indicates that the most significant contributors to these cost savings are suboptimal use of generics, incorrect dosages (too high), and the elimination of incorrect medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that annual medication reviews conducted as part of the ADD service might help reduce medication expenditure when offered to a wider public.

Pharmacist-led medication reviews: A scoping review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Medication reviews aim to support patients who take medicines, and they are often led by pharmacists. There are different types of medication reviews undertaken in various settings. Previous research undertaken in 2015 found mixed evidence that medication reviews in community settings improve clinical outcomes, but further work needs to be undertaken to establish their impact on patient-orientated and economic outcomes.

AIM

This scoping review aims to explore the extent and range of systematic reviews of medication reviews conducted by pharmacists, the nature of the intervention, the evidence for effectiveness, and reported research gaps.

METHOD

Systematic reviews were included irrespective of participants, settings or outcomes and were excluded if pharmacists did not lead the delivery of the included interventions. Data extracted included the design of included studies, population, setting, main results, description of interventions, and future research recommendations.

RESULTS

We identified twenty-four systematic reviews that reported that medication review interventions were diverse, and their nature was often poorly described. Two high-quality reviews reported that there was evidence of no effect on mortality; of these one reported an improvement in medicines-related problems (all studies reported an increase of identified problems), and another a reduction in hospital readmissions (Risk ratio 0.93 [95% CI 0.89, 0.98]). Other lower-quality reviews reported evidence supporting intervention effectiveness for some clinical outcomes (odds ratio: achieving diabetes control = 3.11 95% prediction intervals (PI), 1.48-6.52, achieving blood pressure target = 2.73, 95% PI, 1.05-7.083.50).

CONCLUSION

There is mixed evidence of effectiveness for medication reviews across settings and patient populations. There is limited data about the implementation of medication reviews, therefore is difficult to ascertain which components of the intervention lead to improved outcomes. As medication reviews are widely implemented in practice, further research should explore the nature of the interventions, linking the components of these to outcomes.

Economic cost-benefit analysis of person-centred medicines reviews by general practice pharmacists

BACKGROUND

Medicines reviews by general practice pharmacists improve patient outcomes, but little is known about the associated economic outcomes, particularly in patients at higher risk of medicines-related harm.

AIM

To conduct an economic cost-benefit analysis of pharmacists providing person-centred medicines reviews to patients with hyperpolypharmacy (prescribed ≥ 10 regular medicines) and/or at high risk of medicines-related harm across multiple general practice settings.

METHOD

Service delivery costs were calculated based on the pharmacist's salary, recorded timings, and a general practitioner fee. Direct cost savings were calculated from the cost change of patients' medicines post review, projected over 1 year. Indirect savings were calculated using two models, a population-based model for avoidance of hospital admissions due to adverse drug reactions and an intervention-based model applying a probability of adverse drug reaction avoidance. Sensitivity analyses were performed using varying workday scenarios.

RESULTS

Based on 1471 patients (88.4% with hyperpolypharmacy), the cost of service delivery was €153 per review. Using the population-based model, net cost savings ranging from €198 to €288 per patient review and from €73,317 to €177,696 per annum per pharmacist were calculated. Using the intervention-based model, net cost savings of €651-€741 per review, with corresponding annual savings of €240,870-€457,197 per annum per pharmacist, were calculated. Savings ratios ranged from 181 to 584% across all models and inputs.

CONCLUSION

Person-centred medicines reviews by general practice pharmacists for patients at high risk of medicines-related harm result in substantial cost savings. Wider investment in general practice pharmacists will be beneficial to minimise both patient harm and healthcare system expenditure.

Exploring the heterogeneity in community pharmacist-led medication review studies - A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Findings on the effectiveness of medication reviews led by community pharmacists (CPs) are often inconclusive. It has been hypothesized that studies are not sufficiently standardized, and thus, it is difficult to draw conclusions.

OBJECTIVE(S)

To examine differences in the way CP-led medication review studies are set up. This was accomplished by investigating (1) patient selection criteria, (2) components of the medication review interventions, (3) types of outcomes, and (4) measurement instruments used.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials of CP-led medication reviews was carried out in PubMed and Cochrane Library. Information on patient selection, intervention components, and outcome measurements was extracted, and frequencies were analyzed. Where possible, outcomes were mapped to the Core Outcome Set (COS) for medication review studies. Finally, a network analysis was conducted to explore the influence of individual factors on outcome effects.

RESULTS

In total, 30 articles (26 studies) were included. Most articles had a drug class-specific or disease-specific patient selection criterion (n = 19). Half of the articles included patients aged ≥60 years (n = 15), and in 40% (n = 12/30) patients taking 4 drugs or more. In 24 of 30 articles, a medication review was comprised with additional interventions, such as distribution of educational material and training or follow-up visits. About 40 different outcomes were extracted. Within specific outcomes, the measurement instruments varied, and COS was rarely represented.

CONCLUSION

The revealed differences in patient selection, intervention delivery, and outcome assessment highlight the need for more standardization in research on CP-led medication reviews. While intervention delivery should be more precisely described to capture potential differences between interventions, outcome assessment should be standardized in terms of outcome selection by application of the COS, and with regard to the selected core outcome measurement instruments to enable comparison of the results.

A newly developed algorithm for switching outpatient medications to medications listed in the hospital formulary: a prospective real-word evaluation in patients admitted electively to hospital

PURPOSE

In many countries, outpatient and inpatient care are separated. During hospitalization, therefore, switching the outpatient medication to medication of the hospital formulary is required.

METHODS

We newly designed a switching algorithm in six switching steps (S0-S5) and conducted a study at Bundeswehr Hospital Hamburg (300 beds, 80% civilians). We performed (i) a medication reconciliation to obtain information on outpatient medications and (ii) a medication review to solve drug-related-problems, e.g., drug-drug interactions. We applied (iii) the algorithm to switch medications to the hospital formulary.

RESULTS

(i) We identified 475 outpatient medications (median per patient: 4; Q25/Q75 2/7) in 100 patients consecutively admitted to hospital (median age: 71; Q25/Q75: 64/80 years). Of 475 medications, the switching algorithm could not be used since product names were missing in 23.9% and strength in 1.7%. In 3.2%, switching was not required since medication was not prescribed during the hospital stay. (ii) Drug-drug interactions were identified in 31 of 79 patients with more than one medication. (iii) Of 475 medications, 18.5% were on the hospital formulary and therefore did not need to be  switched (S0), 0.2% were on a substitution-exclusion list not allowing switching (S1), 42.0% were switched to a generic medication of the hospital formulary (S2), 1.7% to a therapeutically equivalent medication (S3), 0.4% were patient-individually switched (S4), and for 8.2% a standardized/patient-individual switching was not possible (S5).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite comprehensive medication reconciliation, patient- and medication-related information for switching medications to the hospital formulary was often missing. Once all the necessary information was available, standardized switching could be easily carried out according to a newly developed switching algorithm.

Components of pharmacist-led medication reviews and their relationship to outcomes: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacist-led medication reviews are an established intervention to support patients prescribed multiple medicines or with complex medication regimes. For this systematic review, a medication review was defined as 'a consultation between a pharmacist and a patient to review the patient's total medicines use with a view to improve patient health outcomes and minimise medicines-related problems'. It is not known how varying approaches to medication reviews lead to different outcomes.

AIM

To explore the common themes associated with positive outcomes from pharmacist-led medication reviews.

METHOD

Randomised controlled trials of pharmacist-led medication reviews in adults aged 18 years and over were included. The search terms used in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were "medication review", "pharmacist", "randomised controlled trial" and their synonyms, time filter 2015 to September 2023. Studies published before 2015 were identified from a previous systematic review. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool. Descriptions of medication reviews' components, implementation and outcomes were narratively synthesised to draw out common themes. Results are presented in tables.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight papers describing 50 studies met the inclusion criteria. Common themes that emerged from synthesis include collaborative working which may help reduce medicines-related problems and the number of medicines prescribed; patient involvement in goal setting and action planning which may improve patients' ability to take medicines as prescribed and help them achieve their treatment goals; additional support and follow-up, which may lead to improved blood pressure, diabetes control, quality of life and a reduction of medicines-related problems.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review identified common themes and components, for example, goal setting, action planning, additional support and follow-up, that may influence outcomes of pharmacist-led medication reviews. Researchers, health professionals and commissioners could use these for a comprehensive evaluation of medication review implementation.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020173907.

Assessment of a Geriatric Evaluation and Management in the Home (GEMITH) Service at a Quaternary Hospital: A Retrospective Observational Study

Background: The increasing aging population in Australia has created a higher demand for specialist geriatric services within hospitals. A Geriatric Evaluation and Management in the Home (GEMITH) service was implemented at a quaternary Queensland hospital. The GEMITH service was unique as it incorporated a specialist pharmacist into the multidisciplinary team. Objective: To determine the medication safety and quality impact of the GEMITH service by evaluating the type and clinical significance of specialist pharmacist interventions. Methods: This was retrospective observational study of clinical interventions made by the GEMITH pharmacist for patients admitted to the service between October 2020 to April 2021. All pharmacist interventions were rated for their clinical significance using the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia (SHPA) risk classification system. The ratings were undertaken by a panel of three pharmacists that independently assessed the interventions, coming together for final discussion. A narrative analysis of the interventions were derived through group consensus. Results: There was a total of 119 admissions to the GEMITH service, with 132 clinical interventions made by the specialist geriatric pharmacist. The majority (47%) of interventions were considered as low risk interventions, although high- (21%) and extreme-risk (2%) interventions still occurred. The most common type of intervention (32%) involved medication reconciliation. Other intervention types included monitoring recommendations, dosing interventions, and deprescribing suggestions. Conclusion: Multiple clinical interventions were made by the GEMITH pharmacist, which prevented possible and significant medication-related harm. This demonstrated the quality impact of the specialist pharmacist in improving medication safety for geriatric patients.

Pharmacist interventions in Asian healthcare environments for older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis on hospitalization, mortality, and quality of life

BACKGROUND

Pharmaceutical interventions play a key role in the care of older people experiencing polypharmacy. Despite the rapid increase in the aging population in Asia, there is a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness of pharmacist interventions on older adult's healthcare. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effects of pharmacist interventions in Asian health care environments on hospitalization, mortality, and quality of life (QoL) among older people in Asia.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted across 5 databases, encompassing studies published from inception through June 2023. Only studies involving pharmacist interventions for people aged 65 years or older, residing in Asian countries, were considered. Studies without evidence of pharmacist involvement or conducted outside of Asia were excluded. Data extraction was performed by two reviewers, one reviewer (I.K.) performed the initial extraction, and another reviewer (G.R.) verified the extracted data. Forest plots were generated using a random effects model to obtain risk ratios or pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs).

RESULTS

A total of 170 articles underwent thorough review, and ultimately, ten studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analyses. These studies encompassed diverse healthcare settings such as outpatient, inpatient, and nursing homes, with sample sizes ranging from 32 to 306 older people. Pharmacist interventions were found to significantly reduce hospitalization rates (n = 5, risk ratio = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.41-0.81) and mortality rates (n = 4, risk ratio = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.37-0.88) among older people. The analysis revealed less significant improvement in QoL in these patients than in those receiving usual care (n = 6, SMD = 0.36, P = 0.057).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the crucial role of pharmacists within healthcare teams in Asian countries. Pharmacist interventions have an impact on reducing hospitalization and mortality rates among the elderly people, underscoring the importance of optimizing patient outcomes in Asia.

Harmonizing the definition of medication reviews for their collaborative implementation and documentation in electronic patient records: A Delphi consensus study

BACKGROUND

Medication review practices have evolved internationally in a direction in which not only physicians but also other healthcare professionals conduct medication reviews according to agreed practices. Collaborative practices have increasingly highlighted the need for electronic joint platforms where information on medication regimens and their implementation can be documented, kept updated, and shared.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to harmonize the definition of medication reviews and create a unified conceptual basis for their collaborative implementation and documentation in electronic patient records (definition appellation: collaborative medication review).

METHODS

The study was conducted using the Delphi consensus survey with three interprofessional expert panel rounds in September-December 2020. The consensus rate was set at 80%. Experts assessed the proposed definition of collaborative medication review based on an international and national inventory of medication review definitions. The expert panel (n = 41) involved 12 physicians, 13 pharmacists, 10 nurses, and six information management professionals. The range of response rates for the rounds was 63-88%.

RESULTS

The experts commented on which of the pre-selected items (n = 75) characterizing medication reviews should be included in the definition of collaborative medication review. The items were divided into the following five themes and 51 of them reached consensus: 1) Actions included in the collaborative medication review (n = 24/24), 2) Settings where the review should be conducted (n = 5/5), 3) Situations where the review should be considered as needed and carried out (n = 10/11), 4) Prioritization of top five benefits to be achieved by the review and 5) Prioritization of top five patient groups to whom the review should be targeted.

CONCLUSIONS

A strong interprofessional consensus was reached on the definition of collaborative medication review. The most challenging was to identify individual patient groups benefiting from the review.

What happens when pharmacist independent prescribers lead on medicine management in older people's care homes: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Older people in care homes frequently experience polypharmacy, increasing the likelihood of medicine-related burden. Pharmacists working within multidisciplinary primary care teams are ideally placed to lead on medication reviews. A randomised controlled trial placed pharmacists, with independent prescribing rights (PIPs), into older people care homes. In the intervention service, PIPs worked with general practitioners (GPs) and care home staff for 6 months, to optimise medicine management at individual resident and care home level. PIP activity included stopping medicines that were no longer needed or where potential harms outweighed benefits. This analysis of qualitative data examines health and social care stakeholders' perceptions of how the service impacted on care home medicine procedures and resident well-being.

DESIGN

Pragmatic research design with secondary analysis of interviews.

SETTING

Primary care pharmacist intervention in older people care homes in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

Recruited from intervention arm of the trial: PIPs (n=14), GPs (n=8), care home managers (n=9) and care home staff (n=6).

RESULTS

There were resonances between different participant groups about potential benefits to care home residents of a medicine service provided by PIPs. There were small differences in perceptions about changes related to communication between professionals. Results are reported through three themes (1) 'It's a natural fit'-pharmacists undertaking medication review in care homes fitted within multidisciplinary care; (2) 'The resident is cared for'-there were subjective improvements in residents' well-being; (3) 'Moving from "firefighting" to effective systems'-there was evidence of changes to care home medicine procedures.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that pharmacist independent prescribers in primary care working within the multidisciplinary team can manage care home residents' medicines leading to subjective improvements in residents' well-being and medicine management procedures. Care home staff appreciated contact with a dedicated person in the GP practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN 17847169.

Activating pharmacists to reduce the frequency of medication-related problems (ACTMed): a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Medicines are the most frequent health care intervention type; their safe use provides significant benefits, but inappropriate use can cause harm. Systemic primary care approaches can manage serious medication-related problems in a timely manner.

OBJECTIVES

ACTMed (ACTivating primary care for MEDicine safety) uses information technology and financial incentives to encourage pharmacists to work more closely with general practitioners to reduce the risk of harm, improve patients' experience of care, streamline workflows, and increase the efficiency of medical care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The stepped wedge cluster randomised trial in 42 Queensland primary care practices will assess the effectiveness of the ACTMed intervention. The primary outcome will be the proportion of people at risk of serious medication-related problems - patients with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, or asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease - who experience such problems. We will also estimate the cost per averted serious medication-related problem and the cost per averted potentially preventable medication-related hospitalisation.

ETHICS APPROVAL

The University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee approved the pilot (2021/HE002189) and trial phases of the ACTMed study (2022/HE002136). Access to Patron data was granted by the Patron Data Governance Committee (PAT052ACTMed). Access to linked hospitalisations and deaths data are subject to Public Health Act approval (pending).

DISSEMINATION OF FINDINGS

A comprehensive dissemination plan will be co-developed by the researchers, the ACTMed steering committee and consumer advisory group, project partners, and trial site representatives. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities will be supported in leading community-level dissemination.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (pilot: ACTRN12622000595718; 21 April 2022; full trial: ACTRN12622000574741; 14 April 2022).

Relationship between assertiveness in community pharmacists and pharmacist-initiated prescription changes

BACKGROUND

Despite the usefulness of assertiveness by healthcare professionals in improving patient safety, few studies have evaluated the assertiveness of community pharmacists. Community pharmacists' assertiveness might be associated with pharmacist-initiated prescribing changes to improve medication safety.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to examine which types of assertiveness-related self-expression are associated with community pharmacist-initiated prescribing changes while adjusting for possible confounding factors.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey in Japan between May and October 2022 in 10 prefectures. Community pharmacists belonging to a large pharmacy chain were recruited. The outcome variable was the frequency of community pharmacist-initiated prescription changes over 1 month. Community pharmacists' assertiveness was assessed using the Interprofessional Assertiveness Scale (IAS) and 3 sub-domains (nonassertive, assertive, and aggressive self-expression). Participants were classified into 1 of 2 categories based on medians. Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared by group with univariate analysis. A generalized linear model (GLM) was used to investigate the association between pharmacist-initiated prescription changes as an ordinal variable and pharmacists' assertiveness.

RESULTS

Of 3346 community pharmacists invited, 963 were included in the analysis. Participants with high assertive self-expression scores had a significantly higher frequency of pharmacist-initiated prescription changes. There was no association between nonassertive or aggressive self-expression and pharmacist-initiated prescription changes. After adjustments, high assertive self-expression remained associated with a high frequency of community pharmacist-initiated prescription changes (odds ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.74; p = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher assertive self-expression among community pharmacists is associated with higher frequency of pharmacist-initiated prescription changes.

Evaluation of a multifaceted medication review in older patients in the outpatient setting: a before-and-after study

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of medication-related emergency department visits and acute hospital admissions in older patients is rising due to the ageing of the population and increasing prevalence of multimorbidity and associated polypharmacy.

AIM

To explore whether a combined medication review performed in the outpatient setting reduces the number of medication-related emergency department visits and hospital (re)admissions.

METHOD

All consecutive patients visiting the geriatric outpatient clinic underwent a multifaceted medication review (i.e. evaluation by at least a geriatrician, and/or pharmacist and use of clinical decision support system). Subsequently, we analysed the number of, and reason for, emergency department visits, acute hospital admissions and readmissions in the year prior to and the year following the index-date (date of first presentation and medication review).

RESULTS

A multifaceted medication review reduced the number of potentially medication-related emergency department visits (38.9% vs. 19.6%, p < 0.01), although the total number of ED visits or acute hospital admissions per patient in the year before and after medication review did not differ.

CONCLUSION

A multifaceted medication review performed in the outpatient clinic reduced the number of potentially medication-related emergency department visits and could therefore reduce negative health outcomes and healthcare costs.

Medication use review: does it have a future and potential in Latvia? The opinion of pharmacists after the pilot project

BACKGROUND

Given that the Medication Use Review (MUR) can be used as a tool to improve the quality, safety, and appropriate use of medications, it has been implemented in several countries around the world. The MUR pilot project was carried out in Latvia, followed by this study to identify obstacles, favorable factors, and benefits of this service from the perspective of pharmacists, being one of the key stakeholders.

METHODS

Qualitative data were obtained through a semi-structured focus group interview with pharmacists participating in the project. Inductive thematic analysis was performed on transcript to describe potential gains, obstacles, and prerequisites for implementing the MUR service from the pharmacist's perspective.

RESULTS

Lack of payment, cooperation with physicians, problems with patient involvement and insufficiency of competence, were identified as the main barriers to implementation of the MUR service as a pharmacist-led service in community pharmacy. However, there were also contributing factors for MUR service, such as the interest of patients and pharmacists involved in the project, the support from the employer, the benefit for physicians, the improvement of patient health literacy and medication adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the potential obstacles, the findings in Latvia, as well as other countries, show that the MUR service contributes to the benefit of patients, pharmacists and also physicians; therefore, further steps should be taken to eliminate obstacles and gain additional insights to implement the MUR service in Latvia.

Facilitating the transfer of care from secondary to primary care: a scoping review to understand the role of pharmacists in general practice

BACKGROUND

Limited published research exists on the role of pharmacists in general practice (primary care pharmacists) in facilitating post-hospital discharge care of patients.

AIM

To summarise and map the nature and extent of current evidence on the role of primary care pharmacists in facilitating patient discharge from secondary to primary care and to inform future practice and research.

METHOD

Six electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to March 2022 for studies published in the English language that described and/or evaluated primary care pharmacist-led interventions for patients following hospital discharge. Grey literature and reference lists of included studies were also searched. Two authors independently screened articles for selection. A structured, pilot-tested form was used for data extraction.

RESULTS

Twenty articles were included. The majority of studies (n = 17; 85%) were conducted in the USA. The most frequently reported intervention made by primary care pharmacists were medication reviews (n = 18) and medication reconciliation (n = 16). Studies have demonstrated the emerging roles of pharmacists involving collaboration with other healthcare professionals, review of laboratory monitoring, referrals, and follow-up. A wide range of outcomes such as the impact on hospital readmission rates, healthcare utilisation and reduction of potential adverse drug events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists in general practice can offer a range of interventions in facilitating transfer of care of patients from secondary to primary care with positive patient and healthcare utilisation outcomes. However, more rigorous research evidence is required to establish the effectiveness, generalisability, acceptability, and sustainability of these services.

A National Modified Delphi Consensus Process to Prioritize Experiences and Interventions for Antipsychotic Medication Deprescribing Among Adult Patients With Critical Illness

Antipsychotic medications are frequently prescribed to critically ill patients leading to their continuation at transitions of care thereafter. The aim of this study was to generate evidence-informed consensus statements with key stakeholders on antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing for ICU patients.

DESIGN

We completed three rounds of surveys in a National modified Delphi consensus process. During rounds 1 and 2, participants used a 9-point Likert scale (1-strongly disagree, 9-strongly agree) to rate perceptions related to antipsychotic prescribing (i.e., experiences regarding delivery of patient care), knowledge and frequency of antipsychotic use, knowledge surrounding antipsychotic guideline recommendations, and strategies (i.e., interventions addressing current antipsychotic prescribing practices) for antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing. Consensus was defined as a median score of 1-3 or 7-9. During round 3, participants ranked statements on antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing strategies that achieved consensus (median score 7-9) using a weighted ranking scale (0-100 points) to determine priority.

SETTING

Online surveys distributed across Canada.

SUBJECTS

Fifty-seven stakeholders (physicians, nurses, pharmacists) who work with ICU patients.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Participants prioritized six consensus statements on strategies for consideration when developing and implementing interventions to guide antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing. Statements focused on limiting antipsychotic prescribing to patients: 1) with hyperactive delirium, 2) at risk to themselves, their family, and/or staff due to agitation, and 3) whose care and treatment are being impacted due to agitation or delirium, and prioritizing 4) communication among staff about antipsychotic effectiveness, 5) direct and efficient communication tools on antipsychotic deprescribing at transitions of care, and 6) medication reconciliation at transitions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

We engaged diverse stakeholders to generate evidence-informed consensus statements regarding antipsychotic prescribing perceptions and practices that can be used to implement interventions to promote antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing strategies for ICU patients with and following critical illness.

Improving Medicines use in People with Polypharmacy in Primary Care (IMPPP): Protocol for a multicentre cluster randomised trial comparing a complex intervention for medication optimization against usual care

Introduction

Polypharmacy is increasingly common, and associated with undesirable consequences. Polypharmacy management necessitates balancing therapeutic benefits and risks, and varying clinical and patient priorities. Current guidance for managing polypharmacy is not supported by high quality evidence. The aim of the Improving Medicines use in People with Polypharmacy in Primary Care (IMPPP) trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention to optimise medication use for patients with polypharmacy in a general practice setting.

Methods

This trial will use a multicentre, open-label, cluster-randomised controlled approach, with two parallel groups. Practices will be randomised to a complex intervention comprising structured medication review (including interprofessional GP/pharmacist treatment planning and patient-facing review) supported by performance feedback, financial incentivisation, clinician training and clinical informatics (intervention), or usual care (control). Patients with polypharmacy and triggering potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) indicators will be recruited in each practice using a computerised search of health records. 37 practices will recruit 50 patients, and review them over a 26-week intervention delivery period. The primary outcome is the mean number of PIP indicators triggered per patient at 26 weeks follow-up, determined objectively from coded GP electronic health records. Secondary outcomes will include patient reported outcome measures, and health and care service use. The main intention-to-treat analysis will use linear mixed effects regression to compare number of PIP indicators triggered at 26 weeks post-review between groups, adjusted for baseline (pre-randomisation) values. A nested process evaluation will explore implementation of the intervention in primary care.

Ethics and dissemination

The protocol and associated study materials have been approved by the Wales REC 6, NHS Research Ethics Committee (REC reference 19/WA/0090), host institution and Health Research Authority. Research outputs will be published in peer-reviewed journals and relevant conferences, and additionally disseminated to patients and the public, clinicians, commissioners and policy makers.

ISRCTN Registration

90146150 (28/03/2019).

Role of primary care pharmacists in the post-hospital discharge care of patients: a scoping review protocol

BACKGROUND

Evidence has shown that there is a significant problem with medication safety when patients are transferred between settings. The role of community pharmacists and hospital pharmacists in facilitating transition of care has been well-researched. However, with the developing role of pharmacists in general practice as part of a multi-disciplinary team, little is known about their role in improving transition of care when patients move from secondary to primary care. The key objective of this scoping review is to understand the nature and extent of the role of primary care pharmacists for patients recently discharged from secondary care.

METHODS

This scoping review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping review underpinned by the Arksey and O'Malley methodology and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The following electronic databases will be systematically searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and NICE Evidence. Reference lists of included full texts will be searched for relevant papers, in addition to grey literature which includes websites of relevant professional organisations. Primary studies, published in the English language that involved a primary care pharmacist-led intervention post-hospital discharge will be included. Two independent reviewers will screen studies against eligibility criteria and use a piloted data extraction form to extract data related to the review questions. The data will be presented in tabular form and assessed for key themes to identify gaps and inform future research.

DISCUSSION

This scoping review will map current evidence surrounding the role of primary care pharmacists in the post-hospital discharge care of patients. Findings will inform ongoing research to support safer transfer-of-care post-hospital discharge and identify ways in which collaboration between healthcare professionals can be improved. This review anticipates guiding the inclusion of patient and public involvement (PPI) at the consultation stage to validate and build on the findings.

Recommendations for community pharmacy to improve access to medication advice for people from ethnic minority communities: A qualitative person-centred codesign study

INTRODUCTION

Medicines-centred consultations are vital to support medicine effectiveness and optimize health outcomes for patients. However, inequalities negatively impact ethnic minority populations when accessing medicines advice. It is important to identify opportunities to improve access for these communities however, knowledge of how best to achieve this is lacking; this study will generate recommendations to improve access to medicines advice from community pharmacies for people from ethnic minority communities.

METHODS

A series of codesign workshops, with four groups of patient-stakeholders, were conducted between September-November 2021; they took place in-person or via video call (adhering to COVID-19 restrictions). Existing evidence-based perceptions affecting access to medicines advice were critiqued and recommendations were generated, by use of reflexive thematic analysis, to improve access for ethnic minority patients. The workshops were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. QSR NVivo (Version 12) facilitated data analysis.

RESULTS

Twelve participants were recruited using purposive sampling; including eight UK citizens, two asylum seekers and two participants in receipt of residency visas. In total, four different ethnic minority groups were represented. Each participant took part in a first and second workshop to share and cocreate recommendations to improve access to medicines advice in community pharmacies. Three recommendations were developed and centred on: (i) delivering and providing culturally competent medicines advice; (ii) building awareness of accessing medicines advice from community pharmacies; and (iii) enabling better discussions with patients from ethnic minority communities.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations have the potential to support community pharmacy services to overcome ethnic inequalities affecting medicines advice; service commissioners should consider these findings to best meet the needs of ethnic minority patients. Cultural competence training for community pharmacy staff could support the creation of pharmacies as inclusive healthcare settings. Collaborative working with ethnic minority communities could enable specific tailoring of medicines-centred services to best meet their needs.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and Newcastle University Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group had extensive input in the study design and conceptualization. Seven patient champions were appointed to the steering group to ensure that the research was conducted, and findings were reported, with cultural competence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Preventive health therapy and behavior outcomes from a brown bag medication review for older adults

BACKGROUND

Morbidity and mortality associated with preventable diseases can be reduced with the use of preventive health services. We evaluated the uptake and retention of preventive health behaviors and management of accidental medication poisonings in older adults after a health prevention educational component was combined with a brown bag medication review.

METHODS

This study used a cohort design and was conducted in six urban senior centers and three independent senior living communities in Detroit, Michigan. Participants included 85 older adults (>60 years old) taking five or more medications with 63 participants returning follow up materials. Pharmacy personnel conducted brown bag medication reviews that were combined with a preventive health education component. Information was collected on medications, vaccinations, supplement use, and accidental medication poisoning management. Participants were given written recommendations on prescription medications and preventive health therapies to improve health and medication use. An investigator developed program satisfaction survey was administered immediately after the review. An investigator-developed follow-up preventive health implementation survey was conducted at least 3 months later to assess recommendation implementation.

RESULTS

Participants' mean age was 75.9 ± 8.5 years. Fifty-six older adults had 124 recommendations in preventive health in total (1-5/participant). Eleven participants had no recommendations. Sixty-three participants (74%) returned follow-up preventive health surveys. Twenty-three percent of recommendations were already implemented with 34% planned to be done in the future. Poisoning management knowledge increased for 13 participants, reporting they would call the poison control center. The program was well received, with participants reporting high satisfaction scores (4.8 ± 0.7 out of 5).

CONCLUSIONS

Brown bag medication reviews can be an effective method to promote the uptake of preventive health behaviors among older adults, but additional accidental medication poisoning management education is still needed.

'He or she maybe doesn't know there is such a thing as a review': A qualitative investigation exploring barriers and facilitators to accessing medication reviews from the perspective of people from ethnic minority communities

Introduction

Regular reviews of medications, including prescription reviews and adherence reviews, are vital to support pharmacological effectiveness and optimize health outcomes for patients. Despite being more likely to report a long‐term illness that requires medication when compared to their white counterparts, individuals from ethnic minority communities are less likely to engage with regular medication reviews, with inequalities negatively affecting their access. It is important to understand what barriers may exist that impact the access of those from ethnic minority communities and to identify measures that may act to facilitate improved service accessibility for these groups.

Methods

Semi‐structured interviews were conducted between June and August 2021 using the following formats as permitted by governmental COVID‐19 restrictions: in person, over the telephone or via video call. Perspectives on service accessibility and any associated barriers and facilitators were discussed. Interviews were audio‐recorded and transcribed verbatim. Reflexive thematic analysis enabled the development of themes. QSR NVivo (Version 12) facilitated data management. Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority (ref: 21/HRA/1426).

Results

In total 20 participants from ethnic minority communities were interviewed; these participants included 16 UK citizens, 2 refugees and 2 asylum seekers, and represented a total of 5 different ethnic groups. Three themes were developed from the data regarding the perceived barriers and facilitators affecting access to medication reviews and identified approaches to improve the accessibility of such services for ethnic minority patients. These centred on (1) building knowledge and understanding about medication reviews; (2) delivering medication review services; and (3) appreciating the lived experience of patients.

Conclusion

The results of this study have important implications for addressing inequalities that affect ethnic minority communities. Involving patients and practitioners to work collaboratively in coproduction approaches could enable better design, implementation and delivery of accessible medication review services that are culturally competent.

Patient or Public Contribution

The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration and Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement group at Newcastle University supported the study design and conceptualization. Seven patient champions inputted to ensure that the research was conducted, and the findings were reported, with cultural sensitivity.

Inpatient pharmacists using a readmission risk model in supporting discharge medication reconciliation to reduce unplanned hospital readmissions: a quality improvement intervention

Introduction

Reducing unplanned hospital readmissions is an important priority for all hospitals and health systems. Hospital discharge can be complicated by discrepancies in the medication reconciliation and/or prescribing processes. Clinical pharmacist involvement in the medication reconciliation process at discharge can help prevent these discrepancies and possibly reduce unplanned hospital readmissions.

Methods

We report the results of our quality improvement intervention at Duke University Hospital, in which pharmacists were involved in the discharge medication reconciliation process on select high-risk general medicine patients over 2 years (2018–2020). Pharmacists performed traditional discharge medication reconciliation which included a review of medications for clinical appropriateness and affordability. A total of 1569 patients were identified as high risk for hospital readmission using the Epic readmission risk model and had a clinical pharmacist review the discharge medication reconciliation.

Results

This intervention was associated with a significantly lower 7-day readmission rate in patients who scored high risk for readmission and received pharmacist support in discharge medication reconciliation versus those patients who did not receive pharmacist support (5.8% vs 7.6%). There was no effect on readmission rates of 14 or 30 days. The clinical pharmacists had at least one intervention on 67% of patients reviewed and averaged 1.75 interventions per patient.

Conclusion

This quality improvement study showed that having clinical pharmacists intervene in the discharge medication reconciliation process in patients identified as high risk for readmission is associated with lower unplanned readmission rates at 7 days. The interventions by pharmacists were significant and well received by ordering providers. This study highlights the important role of a clinical pharmacist in the discharge medication reconciliation process.

The efficacy of single pharmacist medication review among type II diabetic patients who take six chronic medications or more: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Pharmacist medication review has been implemented in many health organizations throughout the world in an attempt to alleviate the underlying risk of polypharmacy in elderly patients. These consultations are often frequent and prolonged, and are thus associated with increased costs. To date, data regarding the most effective way to utilize pharmacist consultations for the improvement of health status is scant.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of a single pharmacist consultation on changes in chronic medication regimes and on selected outcomes of diabetes 1-year after the consultation.

METHODS

A case-control study included an intervention group of 740 patients who had pharmacist consultations and a reference group of 1476 matched patients who did not have a pharmacist consultation. 1-year outcome measures were compared including changes in medications, improved safety, and objective variables such as Hba1c, blood pressure, and lipid profile.

RESULTS

In the pharmacist consultation group, there were significantly more treatment changes ([mean 1.5 vs. 0.7, p < 0.001 medications were stopped], and [mean 1.3 vs. 0.4, p < 0.05 medications were started]). Patient safety improved with a general reduction in opiates and benzodiazepines ([50.0% vs. 31.6%, p < 0.05 opioids were stopped] and [58.8% vs 43.8%, p < 0.001 benzodiazepines were stopped]). Sulfonylurea treatment reduced (10.7% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.05 patients who stopped Sulfonylurea) and Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1) increased (16.4% vs. 11.2%, p < 0.001 patients who started GLP-1). Additionally, HbA1c levels showed a small decrease in the pharmacist consultation group ([- 0.18 ± 1.11] vs. [- 0.051 ± 0.80], p = 0.0058) but no significant differences were found regarding blood pressure or lipids profile.

CONCLUSION

A single pharmacist consultation beneficially impacted specific clinical and patient safety outcomes. Pharmacist consultations may thus help resolve polypharmacy complexities in primary care.

Developing an interprofessional people-centred care model for home-living older people with multimorbidities in a primary care health centre: A community-based study

Background

The ageing population with multiple conditions and complex health needs has forced healthcare systems to rethink the optimal way of delivering services. Instead of trying to manage numerous diseases in a siloed approach, the emphasis should be on people-centred practice, in which healthcare services are tailored to people's needs and provided in partnership with them.

Objective

The aim was to develop an interprofessional people-centred care model (PCCM), including the contribution of a clinically trained pharmacist for home-living multimorbid older people in primary care.

Methods

Participatory action research method, including the active involvement of healthcare professionals, was utilised to develop the PCCM in a public health centre in Finland. The data comprised interview transcripts, workshop materials, field notes, surveys, and memos and were analysed using inductive content analysis.

Results

The PCCM was developed in iterative phases, including planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. The PCCM comprised: 1) A self-management evaluation questionnaire sent before a home visit; 2) A person-centred patient interview at home with a named nurse and a pharmacist; 3) A nurse-led health review and a pharmacist-led clinical medication review; 4) An interprofessional (a GP, a pharmacist and a named nurse) case conference meeting; 5) A care plan, including health and medication plans; and 6) Health support and empowerment interventions. The PCCM shifted working practices in the health centre from parallel and consultative practice towards interprofessional people-centred practice and more holistic care. The patient's active involvement in their own care was encouraged. Healthcare professionals appreciated the advantages of the new skill-mix, including the clinically trained pharmacist. Building trust among healthcare professionals and between the professionals and the patients was essential.

Conclusion

The successfully developed PCCM improved holistic and more people-centred care in primary care. Healthcare professionals appreciated the advantages of the skill mix and found that trust was essential for implementing the PCCM.

Effectiveness of Interventions to Improve the Anticholinergic Prescribing Practice in Older Adults: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapy in older adults is one of the most challenging aspects of patient care. Older people are prone to drug-related problems such as adverse effects, ineffectiveness, underdosage, overdosage, and drug interactions. Anticholinergic medications are associated with poor outcomes in older patients, and there is no specific intervention strategy for reducing drug burden from anticholinergic activity medications. Little is known about the effectiveness of current interventions that may likely improve the anticholinergic prescribing practice in older adults.

AIMS

This review seeks to document all types of interventions aiming to reduce anticholinergic prescribing among older adults and assess the current evidence and quality of existing single and combined interventions.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and PsycINFO from January 1990 to August 2021. Only studies that examined the effect of interventions in older people focused on improving compliance with anticholinergic prescribing guidelines with quantifiable data were included. The primary outcome of interest was to find the effectiveness of interventions that enhance the anticholinergic prescribing practice in older adults.

RESULTS

We screened 3168 records and ended up in 23 studies that met the inclusion criteria. We found only single-component interventions to reduce anticholinergic prescribing errors in older people. Pharmacists implemented interventions without collaboration in nearly half of the studies (n = 11). Medication review (43%) and education provision (26%) to healthcare practitioners were the most common interventions. Sixteen studies (70%) reported significant reductions in anticholinergic prescribing errors, whereas seven studies (30%) showed no significant effect.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review suggests that healthcare practitioner-oriented interventions have the potential to reduce the occurrence of anticholinergic prescribing errors in older people. Interventions were primarily effective in reducing the burden of anticholinergic medications and assisting with deprescribing anticholinergic medications in older adults.

Assessment of a hybrid decision support system using machine learning with artificial intelligence to safely rule out prescriptions from medication review in daily practice

Background Medication review is time-consuming and not exhaustive in most French hospitals. We routinely use an innovative hybrid decision support system using Artificial Intelligence to prioritize medication review by scoring prescriptions by their risk of containing at least one drug related problem (DRP). Aim Our aim was to attest that the prescriptions with low risk of DRPs ruled out by the tool in everyday practice were effectively free of any DRPs with potentially severe clinical impact. Methods We conducted a randomized single-blinded study to compare the rate of pharmaceutical interventions (PI) between low and high-risk prescriptions defined by the tool's calculated score. Prescriptions were reviewed daily by a clinical pharmacist. Proportion of prescriptions with at least one severe DRP was calculated in both groups. Severe DRPs were characterized through a multidisciplinary approach. Results Four hundred and twenty (107 low score and 313 high score) prescriptions were analyzed. The percentage of prescriptions with severe DRPs was dramatically decreased in low score prescriptions (2.8% vs. 15.3% for high-risk; p = 0.0248). A significant difference was found (94% vs. 20%; p < 0.001) in the percentage of severe DRPs detected by the hybrid approach compared to a CDSS. During the study period, the hybrid tool allowed to rule out 55% of all prescriptions in our hospital.Conclusion This hybrid decision support tool has shown to be accurate to detect DRPs in daily practice. Despite some limitations, it offers the best possible solution to prioritized medication review, considering the shortage of clinical pharmacists in France and considerably improves the safety of patients' care.

Association between recorded medication reviews in primary care and adequate drug treatment management - a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between a recorded procedure code for a medication review and adequate drug treatment management, and to explore factors associated with this code.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cross-sectional study; two primary health care centres, in Region Västra Götaland, Sweden.

SUBJECTS

A total of 302 consecutive patients (≥65 years old, 59% female; median number of drugs: six) requiring a non-urgent consultation with a physician in October-November 2017.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Adequate drug treatment management (treatment that did not require any further action), determined in consensus by two specialists in family medicine blinded to the medication review code.

RESULTS

Adequate drug treatment management was, overall, less common in those with a recorded medication review over the last year: 63% versus 73% (p = 0.047). This negative association was evident among patients aged 65-74 years: 49% versus 74% (p = 0.003), but absent in those ≥75 years old: 67% versus 70% (p = 0.77). Recommendations from consensus included the search for additional information to be able to make a decision regarding initiation or withdrawal of a drug (n = 53), withdrawal of a drug (n = 41), or ordering a laboratory test (n = 25). Factors associated with a recorded procedure code included age above the remuneration limit of 75 years (odds ratio: 9.8; 95% confidence interval 5.0-19), type 2 diabetes (3.0 (1.5-6.2)), hypertension (2.4 (1.2-4.8)), and depression (2.5 (1.02-6.0)).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of a recorded medication review was not positively associated with adequate drug treatment management but was associated with the age limit for remuneration, and some chronic diseases.Key pointsTo improve drug treatment in older people in primary care, a remuneration system linked to recorded medication reviews has been introduced.In this study, fewer patients with than without a recorded medication review (63% versus 73%) had adequate drug treatment management.A recorded medication review was ten times more common in those ≥75 years, that is, the age limit for remuneration.Recorded codes for medication reviews were also common in those with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and depression.

Clinical and Humanistic Outcomes of Community Pharmacy-Based Healthcare Interventions Regarding Medication Use in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the clinical and humanistic outcomes of community pharmacy-based interventions on medication-related problems of older adults at the primary care level. We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the impact of various community pharmacy-based interventions from five electronic databases (namely, MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL, APA PSYInfo, and Scopus) from January 2010 to December 2020. Consequently, we assessed these interventions’ clinical and humanistic outcomes on older adults and compared them with non-intervention. We included 13 RCTs in the current review and completed a meta-analysis with six of them. The included studies had a total of 6173 older adults. Quantitative analysis showed that patient education was significantly associated with an increase in the discontinuation of sedative–hypnotics use (risk ratio 1.28; 95% CI (1.20, 1.36) I2 = 0%, p < 0.00001). Moreover, the qualitative analysis showed that medication reviews and education with follow-ups could improve various clinical outcomes, including reducing adverse drug events, reducing uncontrolled health outcomes, and improving appropriate medication use among the elderly population. However, medication review could not significantly reduce the number of older adults who fall (risk ratio 1.25; 95% CI (0.78, 1.99) I2 = 0%, p = 0.36) and require hospitalization (risk ratio 0.72; 95% CI (0.47, 1.12) I2 = 45%, p = 0.15). This study showed that community pharmacy-based interventions could help discontinue inappropriate prescription medications among older adults and could improve several clinical and humanistic outcomes. However, more effective community pharmacy-based interventions should be implemented, and more research is needed to provide further evidence for clinical and humanistic outcomes of such interventions on older adults.

Impact of pharmacist-led interventions on patient care in ambulatory care settings: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

In an era of rapid evolution in healthcare delivery, major changes have occurred within the profession of pharmacist. Because the impact of pharmacist-led interventions in the hospital setting has been well-studied and showed mixed findings on drug-related readmissions, all-cause emergency department visits and mortality, this systematic review focused on services provided by pharmacists in the community or ambulatory care setting without being limited to a specific intervention or outcome.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of pharmacist-led interventions, categorised into clinical medication review (CMR), adherence review (AR), and prescription review (PR) on various aspects of patient care (clinical, behavioural, economic and humanistic outcomes in ambulatory care setting) and understand which particular intervention makes the greatest contribution.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library for publications from 2000 onwards.

FINDINGS AND INTERPRETATION

A total of 31 relevant publications corresponding to 27 controlled trials (CTs) and 4 observational studies were selected. CMR was the most studied pharmacist-led intervention (n = 19, 61.29%), followed by AR (n = 6, 19.3%). CMR demonstrated a favourable effect on different clinical outcomes mainly the management of drug-related problems and adverse events, and it also contributed the most to the reduction of healthcare costs. AR was the most effective intervention to improve patient's adherence. CMR alone or combined with AR both raised equally the patient's satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that CMR can play a major role in the management of drug-related problems and economic issues. AR can significantly improve patient compliance. Larger, standardised and rigorously designed intervention studies are needed to help decision-makers to select appropriate interventions leading to meaningful improvements in patient care.

Medication Review in Preventing Older Adults' Fall-Related Injury: a Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Medication review is essential in managing adverse drug reactions and improving drug safety in older adults. This systematic review evaluated medication review's role as a single intervention or combined with other interventions in preventing fall-related injuries in older adults.

METHODS

Electronic databases search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and CINAHL. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full texts, and performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Meta-analyses were conducted on studies with similar participants, interventions, outcomes or settings.

RESULTS

Fourteen randomized, controlled studies were included. The pooled results indicated that medication review as a stand-alone intervention was effective in preventing fall-related injuries in community-dwelling older adults (Risk Difference [RD] = -0.06, 95% CI: [-0.11, -0.00], I2 = 61%, p = .04). Medication review also had a positive impact on decreasing the risk of fall-related fractures (RD = -0.02, 95% CI: [-0.04, -0.01], I2 = 0%, p = .01).

DISCUSSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis has demonstrated that medication review is effective in preventing fall-related injuries in general, and fractures specifically, in community-dwelling older adults. Future investigations focusing on the process of performing medication review will further inform fall-related injury prevention for older adults.

Impact of pharmacist-led shared medication reviews on adherence among polymedicated older patients: an observational retrospective French study

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate medication use or suboptimal medication adherence among polymedicated older patients is a public health concern. To tackle this issue, a pharmacist-led shared medication review (SMR) system was implemented in French community pharmacies in March 2018. SMR is an analysis of the drug treatments of the older patient with multiple medications. SMR takes place in the form of several interviews, at the pharmacy with the pharmacist, in a confidential space.

OBJECTIVES

This observational real-world study evaluated the impact of the SMR service on medication adherence among polymedicated older patients in France. The risk of drug-related iatrogenic events in this population and the extent to which pharmacist SMR recommendations were followed by prescribers were also assessed.

METHODS

Data were collected using the Observia webtool made by Observia society, a purpose-built digital platform distributed nationwide to community pharmacies to facilitate the SMR process.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed from 439 patients (aged 65-75 years or older) who had completed their SMR at one of 297 French community pharmacies equipped with the Observia webtool. Overall, 186 patients had suboptimal adherence before SMR; 47% of these patients (n = 88) improved to have good adherence after completing the review. The rate of SMR-recommended prescription changes implemented by prescribers was low (14.7%; 38 of 258), with changes being implemented precisely as recommended in 47.4% of cases (n = 18). Potential iatrogenic events were identified in 20 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the SMR service is in the early stages of implementation in France, this study revealed that the process had a positive impact on medication adherence among older polymedicated patients. However, improvements are needed to reinforce prescriber and patient confidence in the system and further improve health outcomes.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a people-centred care model for community-living older people versus usual care ─ A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is a need for effective and cost-effective interprofessional care models that support older people to maintain their quality of life (QoL) and physical performance to live longer independently in their own homes.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate effectiveness, QoL and physical performance, and cost-utility of a people-centred care model (PCCM), including the contribution of clinically trained pharmacists, compared with that of usual care in primary care.

METHODS

A randomised controlled trial (RCT) with a two-year follow-up was conducted. The participants were multimorbid community-living older people, aged ≥75 years. The intervention comprised an at-home patient interview, health review, pharmacist-led clinical medication review, an interprofessional team meeting, and nurse-led care coordination and health support. At the baseline and at the 1-year and 2-year follow-ups, QoL (SF-36, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey) and physical performance (SPPB, Short Performance Physical Battery) were measured. Additionally, a physical dimension component summary in the SF-36 was calculated. The SF-36 data were transformed into SF-6D scores to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Healthcare resource use were collected and transformed into costs. A healthcare payer perspective was adopted. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated, and one-way sensitivity analysis was performed.

RESULTS

No statistically or clinically significant differences were observed between the usual care (n = 126) and intervention group (n = 151) patients in their QoL; at the 2-year follow-up the mean difference was -0.02, (95 % CI -0.07; 0.04,p = 0.56). While the mean difference between the groups in physical performance at the 2-year follow-up was -1.02, (-1.94;-0.10,p = 0.03), between the physical component summary scores it was -7.3, (-15.2; 0.6,p = 0.07). The ICER was -73 638€/QALY, hence, the developed PCCM dominated usual care, since it was more effective and less costly.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-utility analysis showed that the PCCM including pharmacist-led medication review dominated usual care. However, it had no effect on QoL and the effect towards physical performance remained unclear.

A systematic review of general practice-based pharmacists' services to optimize medicines management in older people with multimorbidity and polypharmacy

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated roles of general practice-based pharmacists (PBPs), particularly in optimizing medicines management for older people with both multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the types and effectiveness of services provided by PBPs, either alone or in collaboration with other primary health care professionals, that sought to optimize medicines management for older people with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

METHODS

Eight electronic databases and three trial registries were searched for studies published in English until April 2020. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials and controlled before-and-after studies of services delivered by PBPs in primary care/general practice, for patients aged ≥65 years with both multimorbidity and polypharmacy that focused on a number of outcomes. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 1) and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool were used for quality assessment. A narrative synthesis was conducted due to study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Seven studies met inclusion criteria. All included studies employed PBP-led medication review accompanied by recommendations agreed and implemented by general practitioners. Other patient-level and practice-level interventions were described in one study. The limited available evidence suggested that PBPs, in collaboration with other practice team members, had mixed effects on outcomes focused on optimizing medicines management for older people. Most included studies were of poor quality and data to estimate the risk of bias were often missing.

CONCLUSION

Future high-quality studies are needed to test the effects of PBP interventions on a well-defined range of medicines management-related outcomes.

[What academic training for pharmacy students for clinical pharmacy? Example of shared medication report]

OBJECTIVES

In 2018, the implementation of shared medication reports in pharmacy encourages pharmacists to cooperate with other healthcare professionals. This job allows a decrease of medication errors in elderly. This requires a reorganization of the training offered by universities (initial and continuing training). The aim is to present the results of this pedagogical experimentation.

METHODS

The experimentation (years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019) required the creation of a course to allow students to carry out a pharmaceutical analysis suitable to elderly people, to set up and carry out a shared medication report in pharmacy. Then, during their 6th year internship, students had to carry out at least one shared medication report per month. A monthly follow-up was organized with a database online.

RESULTS

Sixty-four students and 35 internship supervisors participated in the experimentation. All the students improved their ease in using clinical pharmacy tools (pharmaceutical analysis, pharmaceutical interventions, assessment of adherence, etc.). They carried out 345 shared medication reports. In 24.3% of cases, an improvement in the prescription was proposed to the doctor (general practitioner or specialist). For 80% of the internship supervisors, the initial training of the students helped to set up this new pharmacy activity.

CONCLUSIONS

This teaching is appreciated by students and internship supervisors. It enabled the adoption of the various tools essential for carrying out shared medication reports in pharmacy. Shared medication reports reinforce the multidisciplinary work of pharmacists, especially with general practitioners.

Pharmacist-led intervention on the reduction of inappropriate medication use in patients with heart failure: A systematic review of randomized trials and non-randomized intervention studies

BACKGROUND

Polipharmacy has been identified as a contributing factor to the high hospital readmission rates of heart failure (HF) patients. Nevertheless, there limited evidence on pharmacist-led intervention on the reduction of inappropriate medication use in patients.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the available evidence resulting from interventions, led by pharmacists (alone or as part of a professional team), aimed at reducing inappropriate medications in patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE through PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Scopus until June 2020. We reviewed both randomized controlled trials and non-randomized intervention studies.The quality of evidence was assessed in accordance with the modified Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. The search and extraction process followed PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Of the 4367 records screening, 9 studies were included in the analysis. In 4 (44.4%) studies, the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist working together with a physician; in 4 (44.4%) the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist alone, and in 1 study, the pharmacist collaborated with a nurse. Only 5 (55.5%) studies described the utilization of guidelines or recommendations to carry out the deprescription, and 3 of these showed improved clinical outcomes in the interventional group compared to the control group. The other studies (4, 44.4%) did not follow a specific guideline or recommendation to evaluate the appropriateness of medication, and none of them showed statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between interventional and control groups.

CONCLUSION

Only those studies where pharmacists evaluated the appropriateness of treatment to specific HF guidelines showed significant differences in patients' clinical outcomes. The development and validation of a specific tool to evaluate medication appropriateness in patients with HF, could contribute to the improvement of patient health.

Intervention effectiveness by pharmacists integrated within an interdisciplinary health team on chronic complex patients

BACKGROUND

Nowadays, it is difficult to establish a specific method of intervention by the pharmacist and its clinical repercussions. Our aim was to identify interventions by pharmacists integrated within an interdisciplinary team for chronic complex patients (CCPs) and determine which of them produce the best results.

METHODS

A systematic review (SR) was performed based on PICO(d) question (2008-18): (Population): CCPs; (Intervention): carried out by health system pharmacists in collaboration with an interdisciplinary team; (Comparator): any; (Outcome): clinical and health resources usage outcomes; (Design): meta-analysis, SR and randomized clinical trials.

RESULTS

Nine articles were included: one SR and eight randomized clinical trials. The interventions consisted mainly in putting in order the pharmacotherapy and the review of the medication adequacy, medication reconciliation in transition of care and educational intervention for health professionals. Only one showed significant improvements in mortality (27.9% vs. 38.5%; HR = 1.49; P = 0.026), two in health-related quality of life [according to EQ-5D (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions) and EQ-VAS (European Quality of Life-Visual Analog Scale) tests] and four in other health-related results (subjective self-assessment scales, falls or episodes of delirium and negative health outcomes associated with medication). Significant differences between groups were found in hospital stay and frequency of visits to the emergency department. No better results were observed in hospitalization rate. Otherwise, one study measured cost utility and found a cost of €45 987 per quality-adjusted life year gained due to the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

It was not possible to determine with certainty which interventions produce the best results in CCPs. The clinical heterogeneity of the studies and the short follow-up of most studies probably contributed to this uncertainty.

Methodological standards for conducting and reporting meta-analyses: Ensuring the replicability of meta-analyses of pharmacist-led medication review

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses of clinical pharmacy services are frequently criticized for restricted data transparency and reproducibility.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the methodological characteristics of meta-analyses of pharmacist-led medication reviews, to identify the elements that limit their replicability and robustness, and to propose recommendations for an appropriate conduction and reporting.

METHODS

A meta-research study was conducted. Systematic searches of the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were performed to identify meta-analyses of pharmacist services. Meta-analyses assessing the effect of pharmacist-led medication reviews were selected for data extraction, analysis and replication. Two replication exercises were performed for the two most common outcomes: (i) considering the data provided by authors to construct the meta-analysis and (ii) considering the raw data available in the primary studies included. Prediction intervals (PI), fragility index (FI), and number needed to treat (NNT) were also calculated for each replicated meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Nine studies reporting meta-analyses about pharmacist-led medication review were found comprising 30 different outcomes. Eleven meta-analyses, including six for hospital admission and five for mortality, were replicated. In five meta-analyses, the pooled effect sizes of the replicated meta-analyses differed from the original ones. Only four meta-analyses mentioned the statistical method used. Other meta-analytic parameters (e.g., q-value, tau2) were omitted in all studies. In nine meta-analyses, the data from primary studies had been incorrectly extracted for at least one variable. The PI demonstrated that the uncertainty intervals of the effect sizes were always underestimated by the authors. NNTs showed wide intervals, ranging from benefit to harm, in almost all meta-analyses. Nine recommendations to facilitate the replication of a meta-analysis were proposed: providing all original data needed to build the analysis; informing about the imputed data or data obtained from different sources; performing sensitivity analyses for imputed or unpublished data; inform about all the statistical methods used; providing all statistical results; and reporting the PI, FI and NNT.

CONCLUSION

Errors in data extraction and poor reporting of meta-analytic parameters are common in the pharmacy literature. We proposed nine recommendations to enhance data reproducibility and interpretability. Journal editors and peer reviewers should ensure that authors strictly comply with minimum standards for conduction and reporting of meta-analyses.

Proposition of a structured list of information items to be transmitted to primary caregivers after in-hospital medication optimization: a qualitative study

Background and objective: Defective transmission of drug information during the transition from hospital to home care are causes of adverse drug reactions in older patients. We aimed to reach a consensus concerning information about changes in treatment to be transmitted to primary caregivers when an older patient is discharged from hospital.Methods: A qualitative focus group study was conducted with general practitioners, geriatricians, community pharmacists, and hospital pharmacists providing care for older patients. Four steps were used to reach a focus group consensus: 1) presentation of the purpose of the focus group; 2) generation and enumeration of ideas; 3) sharing opinions about these ideas; 4) voting to create a list of ranked items. The process involved three focus groups.Results: A consensus was reached on ten items: indication for continued, discontinued, newly introduced or changed treatments and their duration; reasons for discontinuing drugs or introducing new drugs; information about re-evaluating treatments; reasons for hospital stay, significant elements and diagnosis at discharge; administrative information concerning the patient; the name of the primary care physician, and the discharging hospital unit and the physician(s) in charge; known allergies, information about liver and kidney failure; main adverse effects to monitor; date of latest blood tests; hospital admission/discharge dates.Conclusion: The consensus on the list of information items concerning changes in the treatment should be used by hospital physicians and pharmacists to ensure safe patient discharge.

Impact of Medication Reviews Delivered by Community Pharmacist to Elderly Patients on Polypharmacy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess the impact of medication reviews delivered by community pharmacists to elderly patients on polypharmacy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in four bibliographic databases/search engine (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and IPA) and three gray literature sources (OpenGrey, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Digital Access to Research Theses - Europe) from inception to January 2018. Randomized controlled trials were selected if they met the following criteria: (a) studied in patients 65 years or older who were taking four or more prescribed medications; (b) the "test" interventions were delivered by community pharmacists; and (c) measured one of these following outcomes: hospitalization, emergency department (ED) visit, quality of life, or adherence. Quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group risk of bias tool. Random-effects model meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of the 3634 articles screened, four studies with a total of 4633 participants were included. The intervention provided in all included studies was clinical medication review. Three studies were at low risk of bias, and the remaining study had unclear risk of bias. When compared with usual care, medication reviews provided by community pharmacist significantly reduced risk of ED visits (risk ratio = 0.68; 95% confidence interval = 0.48-0.96). There was also a tendency that pharmacist interventions decreased risk of hospitalizations (risk ratio = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.78-1.00), although no statistical significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence demonstrates that clinical medication reviews for older people with polypharmacy reduces the risk of ED visits. Medication reviews can be considered as another area where community pharmacists can contribute to improve patient safety.

Minimising prescription errors-a quality improvement project in the ophthalmology department in a tertiary referral hospital

PURPOSE

The aim of this quality improvement project was to look into the hospital prescriptions and to identify and record the type and number of errors, to implement measures to reduce the risk of these errors and then to reaudit to assess the impact of changes implemented.

METHODS

The initial audit was conducted prospectively over a eleven-week period. Prescriptions written by doctors of all grades and members of the staff, such as optometrists and nurses, were analysed. A glaucoma prescription guide along with more training at prescribing for doctors was introduced with a view to reducing these errors. A reaudit later demonstrated a significant reduction in these errors.

RESULTS

After the introduction of a glaucoma prescription guide and more training for all grades of staff members, prescription errors reduced to 73/2342 (3.1%). Reaudit showed a reduction in both prescription writing errors 50/73(68.4%) and drug-related errors 23/73(31.6%).

CONCLUSION

Prescription errors are avoidable. This audit demonstrated that providing an accessible, easy to read and understand glaucoma prescription guide in the outpatient department along with targeted training for medical staff in prescribing can help in minimising these errors and can lead to safer practice.

Association of pharmacist counseling with adherence, 30-day readmission, and mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE(S)

To determine the association of pharmacist medication counseling with medication adherence, 30-day hospital readmission, and mortality.

METHODS

The initial search identified 21,590 citations. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 62 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (49 for the meta-analysis) were included in the final analysis. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The participants in most of the studies were older patients with chronic diseases who, therefore, were taking many drugs. The overall methodologic quality of evidence ranged from low to very low. Pharmacist medication counseling versus no such counseling was associated with a statistically significant 30% increase in relative risk (RR) for medication adherence, a 24% RR reduction in 30-day hospital readmission (number needed to treat = 4.2), and a 30% RR reduction in emergency department visits. RR reductions for primary care visits and mortality were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The evidence supports pharmacist medication counseling to increase medication adherence and to reduce 30-day hospital readmissions and emergency department visits. However, higher-quality RCT studies are needed to confirm or refute these findings.

Medication review interventions to reduce hospital readmissions in older people

Objective

To assess the efficacy of medication review as an isolated intervention and with several co‐interventions for preventing hospital readmissions in older adults.

Methods

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and CINAHL were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of medication review interventions with or without co‐interventions to prevent hospital readmissions in hospitalized or recently discharged adults aged ≥65, until September 13, 2019. Included outcomes were “at least one all‐cause hospital readmission within 30 days and at any time after discharge from the index admission.”

Results

Twenty‐five studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 studies (7,318 participants) contributed to the network meta‐analysis (NMA) on all‐cause hospital readmission within 30 days. Medication review in combination with (a) medication reconciliation and patient education (risk ratio (RR) 0.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26–0.80) and (b) medication reconciliation, patient education, professional education and transitional care (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.49–0.84) were associated with a lower risk of all‐cause hospital readmission compared to usual care. Medication review in isolation did not significantly influence hospital readmissions (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.45–2.51). The NMA on all‐cause hospital readmission at any time included 24 studies (11,677 participants). Medication review combined with medication reconciliation, patient education, professional education and transitional care resulted in a reduction of hospital readmissions (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.74–0.91) compared to usual care. The quality of the studies included in this systematic review raised some concerns, mainly regarding allocation concealment, blinding and contamination.

Conclusion

Medication review in combination with medication reconciliation, patient education, professional education and transitional care, was associated with a lower risk of hospital readmissions compared to usual care. An effect of medication review without co‐interventions was not demonstrated. Trials of higher quality are needed in this field.

The Contribution of Pharmacists and Pharmacy Technicians to Person-Centred Care within a Medicine's Optimisation in Care Homes Service: A Qualitative Evaluation

Pharmacists and pharmacy technicians seek to improve person-centred care. Improvements to systems for care homes seeks to reduce medicines waste and inefficiency, particularly through supporting care home staff, to enhance safer administration of medicines. A complex evaluation used qualitative design and utilised narrative enquiry, and team members and key stakeholders were interviewed. Framework analysis was used, aligning findings to a person-centred care framework for older people. The Medicines Optimisation in Care Homes (MOCH) team brokered improvement practices across care homes to enhance person-centred care. The framework analysis confirms that the team used ‘authentic attention’ in relation to the residents’ experiences and flexibility in relation to negotiating medication. The importance of transparency of processes and systems in medicines management is highlighted, alongside requirements for person-centred care to make explicit the reason for taking a medication, and the continuous discussion with a range of stakeholders about the continuing need for particular medications. The outcome of the evaluation includes insights into a new area of pharmacy practice in community, based on the skills, knowledge, and experience of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians working in the care home sector. Further study is needed into the efficacy and outcomes of medicines management interventions.

The Impact of Medication Reviews Conducted in Primary Care on Hospital Admissions and Mortality: An Observational Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Drug-related problems among the elderly population are common and increasing. Multi-professional medication reviews (MR) have arisen as a method to optimize drug therapy for frail elderly patients. Research has not yet been able to show conclusive evidence of the effect of MRs on mortality or hospital admissions.

Aim

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of MRs’ on hospital admissions and mortality after six and 12 months in a frail population of 369 patients in primary care in a cohort from a randomized controlled study.

Methods

Patients were blindly randomized to an intervention group (receiving MRs) and a control group (receiving usual care). Descriptive data on mortality and hospital admissions at six and 12 months were collected. Survival analysis was performed for time to death and time to the first hospital admission within 12 months.

Results

An observational follow-up was performed in a cohort of 369 patients, previously randomized to an intervention group (182) and a control group (187). Most of the patients (75%) were females and lived in nursing homes. At six months, 50 patients of the baseline population (27%) in the control group had been admitted to hospital at least once, compared to 40 patients (21%) in the intervention group. At 12 months, the percentage had increased to 70 (37%) in the control group compared to 53 (29%) in the intervention group. Compared to usual care, we found that MRs reduced the risk of hospital admissions within 12 months by 42% (HR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.37–0.92, p=0.021), but found no difference in mortality (HR = 1.12, 95% CI 0.78–1.61, p=0.551) between the groups.

Conclusion

We suggest that MRs should be recommended in the care of frail elderly patients with expected benefits on delayed hospital admissions. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT04040855, Unique Protocol ID 2018/8.

Qualitative study of medication review in Flanders, Belgium among community pharmacists and general practitioners

Objective Examining the implementation barriers and facilitators of this service as provided by Belgian community pharmacists in collaboration with general practitioners. Setting Community pharmacies in Flanders. Method Qualitative study through interviews of pharmacists and general practitioners. Main outcome measure Opinions and experiences of pharmacists and general practitioners about type 3 medication review. Results Sixteen community pharmacists and thirteen general practitioners were interviewed and generally gave a positive assessment of the project. The general practitioners saw the pharmaceutical and pharmacotherapeutic recommendations of the pharmacists as an added value for the patients. The pharmacists indicated that performing an medication review was time-consuming, but that it improved their professional relationship with general practitioners and patients. They reported obstacles in obtaining information: cumbersome access to individual patient data (laboratory values) and difficulties in finding and choosing adequate medical information sources. Moreover, pharmacists indicated that there is a need for adequate reimbursement and additional training to make the implementation sustainable. Conclusion Both pharmacists and general practitioners were enthusiastic about medication reviews. The implementation improved the interprofessional collaboration. However, important barriers remain, such as the considerable investment of time and the difficulty in gathering all the necessary information. The sustainable implementation of type 3 medication review in Belgium requires adequate reimbursement and additional training.

Predicting negative health outcomes in older general practice patients with chronic illness: Rationale and development of the PROPERmed harmonized individual participant data database

The prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy increases significantly with age and are associated with negative health consequences. However, most current interventions to optimize medication have failed to show significant effects on patient-relevant outcomes. This may be due to ineffectiveness of interventions themselves but may also reflect other factors: insufficient sample sizes, heterogeneity of population. To address this issue, the international PROPERmed collaboration was set up to obtain/synthesize individual participant data (IPD) from five cluster-randomized trials. The trials took place in Germany and The Netherlands and aimed to optimize medication in older general practice patients with chronic illness. PROPERmed is the first database of IPD to be drawn from multiple trials in this patient population and setting. It offers the opportunity to derive prognostic models with increased statistical power for prediction of patient-relevant outcomes resulting from the interplay of multimorbidity and polypharmacy. This may help patients from this heterogeneous group to be stratified according to risk and enable clinicians to identify patients that are likely to benefit most from resource/time-intensive interventions. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the rationale behind PROPERmed collaboration, characteristics of the included studies/participants, development of the harmonized IPD database and challenges faced during this process.

Provision of home medicines reviews in Australia: linking population need with service provision and available pharmacist workforce

Objective Identifying and quantifying the health needs of a population are the basis of evidence-based health policy and workforce planning. The motivation for undertaking the present study was to evaluate whether the current level of medication review services corresponds to population need, as proxied by the rate of polypharmacy, and to undertake a preliminary analysis of the sufficiency of the current workforce. This paper: (1) estimates the age- and sex-standardised rates of polypharmacy as a proxy for population need for home medicines review; (2) compares the rate of polypharmacy with current service provision of home medicines reviews; and (3) links the estimated need for services with the current number and location of pharmacist providers. Methods Age- and sex-adjusted polypharmacy rates, by state, were estimated from the National Health Survey of Australia (2017-18), service levels were estimated from national-level administrative claims data (2017-18) and the current workforce was estimated from the Australian Association of Consultant Pharmacists (2018). The current level of service provision was compared to the estimated population need for services, alongside the size of the pharmacy workforce required if need was met. Results The adjusted rate of polypharmacy in Australia, using the strictest definition of ≥10 medications and ≥3 current chronic illnesses, was 1389 per 100000 population. The illustrative needs-based analysis suggests that there may be a disconnect between the current level of service provision and population health needs. Conclusion Given that polypharmacy is a risk factor for medication-related problems, and that medication review is one of the few targeted strategies currently available to address medication-related problems in the population, service provision may be inadequate. Policy options to improve service provision could include interventions to increase workforce productivity and relaxing the current eligibility criteria for review, especially in rural and remote areas. What is known about the topic? Polypharmacy is a risk factor for medication-related problems, which can cause increased morbidity and mortality in the population. What does this paper add? This paper provides representative, population-based rates of polypharmacy in Australia and uses these rates in a needs-based analysis of service provision and workforce adequacy to provide home medicines review services. What are the implications for practitioners? Several policy options are available for consideration, including interventions to increase workforce productivity and relaxation of the current eligibility criteria for medicines review, especially in rural and remote areas.

Medication Counselling in Older Patients Prior to Hospital Discharge: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Older patients are regularly exposed to multiple medication changes during a hospital stay and are more likely to experience problems understanding these changes. Medication counselling is often proposed as an important component of seamless care to ensure appropriate medication use after hospital discharge.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this systematic review was to describe the components of medication counselling in older patients (aged ≥ 65 years) prior to hospital discharge and to review the effectiveness of such counselling on reported clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology (PROSPERO CRD42019116036), a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL was conducted. The QualSyst Assessment Tool was used to assess bias. The impact of medication counselling on different outcomes was described and stratified by intervention content.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included. Fifteen different components of medication counselling were identified. Discussing the dose and dosage of patients' medications (19/29; 65.5%), providing a paper-based medication list (19/29; 65.5%) and explaining the indications of the prescribed medications (17/29; 58.6%) were the most frequently encountered components during the counselling session. Twelve different clinical outcomes were investigated in the 29 studies. A positive effect of medication counselling on medication adherence and medication knowledge was found more frequently, compared to its impact on hard outcomes such as hospital readmissions and mortality. Yet, evidence remains inconclusive regarding clinical benefit, owing to study design heterogeneity and different intervention components. Statistically significant results were more frequently observed when counselling was provided as part of a comprehensive intervention before discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial heterogeneity between the included studies was found for the components of medication counselling and the reported outcomes. Study findings suggest that medication counselling should be part of multifaceted interventions, but the evidence concerning clinical outcomes remains inconclusive.

Impact of the Goal-directed Medication Review Electronic Decision Support System on Drug Burden Index: A cluster-randomised clinical trial in primary care

AIMS

The Goal-directed Medication Review Electronic Decision Support System (G-MEDSS) assesses and reports a patient's goals, attitudes to deprescribing and Drug Burden Index (DBI) score, a measure of cumulative exposure to anticholinergic and sedative medications. This study evaluated the effect of implementing G-MEDSS in home medicines reviews (HMRs) on DBI exposure and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A cluster-randomised clinical trial was performed across Australia. Accredited clinical pharmacists were randomised into intervention (G-MEDSS with usual care HMR) or comparison groups (usual care HMR alone). Patients were recruited by pharmacists from those routinely referred by general practitioners for HMR. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with any reduction in DBI at 3-months follow-up. Secondary outcomes included change in DBI continuous score at 3-months, HMR recommendations to change DBI and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 201 patient participants at baseline (n = 88 intervention, n = 113 comparison), with 159 followed-up at 3-months (n = 63 intervention, n = 96 comparison). The proportion of patients with a reduction in DBI was not significantly different at 3-months (intervention 17%, comparison 11%; adjusted odds ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 0.56-3.80). Regarding secondary outcomes, there was no difference in change in DBI score at 3-months. However, the HMR report made recommendations to reduce DBI for a significantly greater proportion of patients in the intervention than in the comparison group (intervention 37%, comparison 14%; adjusted odds ratio 3.20, 95% confidence interval 1.50-6.90). No changes were observed in clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of G-MEDSS within HMR did not reduce patients' DBI at 3 months compared with usual care HMR.