MEDICATION APPROPRIATENESS INDEX: RELIABILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE USE

Telemedicine in geriatric oncology is here to stay

Introduction

Advancing age is the most important risk factor for cancer. Collaborations with medical and surgical-oncology divisions, and supportive services are required to assist older adults with cancer through their assessment and treatment trajectories. This often requires numerous clinical encounters which can increase treatment burden on the patient and caregivers. One solution that may lighten this load is the use of telemedicine.

Methods

At Memorial Sloan Kettering, the Cancer and Aging Interdisciplinary Team (CAIT) clinic risk stratifies and optimizes older adults planned for medical cancer treatment. We analyzed patients seen in the CAIT clinic between May 2021 and December 2023, focusing on their utilization of telemedicine, and on the differences in characteristics of the visits and the results of the Geriatric Assessment based on visit type.

Results

Of the 288 patients (age range 67-100) evaluated, the majority (77%) chose telemedicine visits. Older age, lower educational status, living in New York City, abnormal cognitive screen, impaired performance measures, IADL dependency and having poor social support were all associated with choosing an in-person visit as opposed to telemedicine.

Conclusion

Older patients with cancer frequently choose and can complete telemedicine visits. Efforts should be directed to develop an infrastructure for remote engagement, improving reach into rural and underserved areas, decreasing the burden generated by multiple appointments.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration: CRD42022334685.

Development and implementation of an interdisciplinary telemedicine clinic for older patients with cancer-Preliminary data

BACKGROUND

Frailty assessment is an important marker of the older adult's fitness for cancer treatment independent of age. Pretreatment geriatric assessment (GA) is associated with improved mortality and morbidity outcomes but must occur in a time sensitive manner to be useful for cancer treatment decision making. Unfortunately, time, resources and other constraints make GA difficult to perform in busy oncology clinics. We developed the Cancer and Aging Interdisciplinary Team (CAIT) clinic model to provide timely GA and treatment recommendations independent of patient's physical location.

METHODS

The interdisciplinary CAIT clinic model was developed utilizing the surge in telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic. The core team consists of the patient's oncologist, geriatrician, registered nurse, pharmacist, and registered dietitian. The clinic's format is flexible, and the various assessments can be asynchronous. Patients choose the service method-in person, remotely, or hybrid. Based on GA outcomes, the geriatrician provides recommendations and arrange interventions. An assessment summary including life expectancy estimates and chemotoxicity risk calculator scores is conveyed to and discussed with the treating oncologist. Physician and patient satisfaction were assessed.

RESULTS

Between May 2021 and June 2022, 50 patients from multiple physical locations were evaluated in the CAIT clinic. Sixty-eight percent was 80 years of age or older (range 67-99). All the evaluations were hybrid. The median days between receiving a referral and having the appointment was 8. GA detected multiple unidentified impairments. About half of the patients (52%) went on to receive chemotherapy (24% standard dose, 28% with dose modifications). The rest received radiation (20%), immune (12%) or hormonal (4%) therapies, 2% underwent surgery, 2% chose alternative medicine, 8% were placed under observation, and 6% enrolled in hospice care. Feedback was extremely positive.

CONCLUSIONS

The successful development of the CAIT clinic model provides strong support for the potential dissemination across services and institutions.

Impact of a clinical pharmacist on optimising the quality use of medicines according to the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) secondary prevention guidelines and medication adherence following discharge in patients with ACS in Sri Lanka: a prospective non-randomised controlled trial study protocol

OBJECTIVES

Ensuring quality use of medicines (QUM) through clinical pharmacy services can improve therapeutic outcomes of patients diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The major objective of this study is to demonstrate the added value of a clinical pharmacist to the medical and nursing team providing care to patients with ACS on the continuation of quality use of the patients' medicine after discharge.

STUDY DESIGN

This protocol outlines a prospective, non-blinded, non-randomised, controlled interventional study.

STUDY SETTING

The study will be conducted at the professorial medical wards of a tertiary care teaching hospital in Sri Lanka.

PARTICIPANTS

Sample size will be 746 patients in both control and intervention arms. Patients diagnosed with ACS who are 18 years old or above and expected to visit the hospital for their routine clinic follow-ups after discharge will be recruited and randomised 1:1 to either the intervention group or the control group. Patients who are diagnosed and suffering from psychological disorders will be excluded from this study.

INTERVENTIONS

The planned interventions that will be delivered at discharge include review and optimisation of medications, assessing patient adherence and providing discharge medication counselling. Data will be collected at recruitment, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months' time intervals in both groups. Improvement of patients' medication adherence, reduction of hospital readmissions, reduction of drug-related problems, the attitude of doctors and nurses towards clinical pharmacy services and the cost-effectiveness of the clinical pharmacy services will be the major outcomes of this study.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval for this study has been obtained from the ethics review committee, Faculty of Medicine, University of Peradeniya (2019/EC/26) and the trial is registered at the Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry. The results of this study will be disseminated via conference proceedings, journal publications and thesis presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

SLCTR/2019/039.

Clinical Utility of Medication-Based Risk Scores to Reduce Polypharmacy and Potentially Avoidable Healthcare Utilization

The management of multiple chronic health conditions often requires patients to be exposed to polypharmacy to improve their health and enhance their quality of life. However, exposure to polypharmacy has been associated with an increased risk for adverse effects, drug-drug interactions, inappropriate prescribing, medication nonadherence, increased healthcare utilization such as emergency department visits and hospitalizations, and costs. Medication-based risk scores have been utilized to identify patients who may benefit from deprescribing interventions and reduce rates of inappropriate prescribing. These risk scores may also be utilized to prompt targeted discussions between patients and providers regarding medications or medication classes contributing to an individual’s risk for harm, eventually leading to the deprescribing of the offending medication(s). This opinion will describe existing medication-based risk scores in the literature, their utility in identifying patients at risk for specific adverse events, and how they may be incorporated in healthcare settings to reduce rates of potentially inappropriate polypharmacy and avoidable healthcare utilization and costs.

Medication Appropriateness, Polypharmacy, and Drug-Drug Interactions in Ambulatory Elderly Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases at Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital, Ethiopia

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

The effect of comprehensive assessment and multi-disciplinary management for the geriatric and frail patient: A multi-center, randomized, parallel controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) of elderly patients is useful for detecting the patients vulnerabilities. Exercise and early rehabilitation, nutritional intervention, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), standardized medication guidance, and patient education can, separately, improve and even reverse the physical frailty status. However, the effect of combining a CGA and multi-disciplinary management on frailty in elderly patients remains unclear. The present study assessed the effects of a CGA and multi-disciplinary management on elderly patients with frailty in China.

METHODS

In this study, 320 in patients with frailty ≥70 years old will be randomly divided into an intervention group and a control group. The intervention group will be given routine management, a CGA and multi-disciplinary management involving rehabilitation exercise, diet adjustment, multi-drug evaluation, acupoint massage in TCM and patient education for 12 months, and the control group will be followed up with routine management for basic diseases. The primary outcomes are the Fried phenotype and short physical performance battery (SPPB). The secondary outcomes are the clinical frailty scale (CFS), non-elective hospital readmission, basic activities of daily living (BADL), 5-level European quality of life 5 dimensions index (EQ-5D), nutrition risk screening-2002 (NRS-2002), medical insurance expenses, fall events, and all-cause mortality. In addition, a cost-effectiveness study will be carried out.

DISCUSSION

This paper outlines the protocol for a randomized, single-blind, parallel multi-center clinical study. This protocol, if beneficial, will demonstrate the interaction of various intervention strategies, will help improve elderly frailty patients, and will be useful for clinicians, nurses, policymakers, public health authorities, and the general population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trials Register, ChiCTR1900022623. Registered on April 19, 2019, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=38141.

Quality of clinical direct oral anticoagulant prescribing and identification of risk factors for inappropriate prescriptions

AIMS

Even though the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is safe based on clinical outcomes, drug safety also depends on appropriateness of drug prescription, which is challenging for DOACs since many patient factors need to be considered. The aim of this study was to assess the appropriateness of DOAC prescriptions and to identify risk factors of determinants for inappropriate DOAC prescriptions.

METHODS

A retrospective study in a nonuniversity teaching hospital was performed of hospitalized patients (≥18 years) who received an initial DOAC prescription between February and August 2018. Appropriateness of prescribing was evaluated on 8 criteria by using a modified version of the medication appropriateness index.

RESULTS

A total of 770 initial DOAC prescriptions of inpatients were evaluated: 267 patients (34.6%) had at least met 1 inappropriate criterion for a DOAC prescription. The most frequent inappropriate criterion was dosage (17.4%). Of the 4 DOACs, dabigatran (21.6%) and apixaban (21.2%) were mostly inappropriate dosed. In a multivariable analysis, reduced renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate <50 mL/min; odds ratio [OR] = 2.35; P < .001), a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (OR = 1.87; P = .004), and 'prescribed by surgeons' (OR = 1.9; P = .013) were independently associated with inappropriateness of prescribing.

CONCLUSION

This study has highlighted a high degree of inappropriate prescribing of DOACs. These results underline the need for targeted interventions to improve DOAC prescribing.

Knowledge and willingness of physicians about deprescribing among older patients: a qualitative study

Purpose

This study aimed to explore the physician’s knowledge and identify the perceived barriers that prevent family medicine physicians from engaging in deprescribing among older patients.

Methods

This qualitative study was designed and conducted using an interpretive theoretical approach. Purposive sampling was undertaken, whereby family medicine physicians of King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, were invited to participate in the study. The topic guidelines were designed to give the physicians the freedom to express their views on exploring their knowledge about deprescribing and to identify the perceived barriers and enablers that prevent them from engaging in the practice in older patients. The focus group discussions were conducted in English, audio-taped with permission, and transcribed verbatim. Each transcript was independently reviewed and coded separately to explore the themes and sub-themes.

Results

A total of 15 physicians participated in three focus group discussions. Their thematic content analysis identified 24 factors that facilitated or hindered deprescribing. The facilitators included cost-effectiveness and time effectiveness, side effects avoidance, clinical pharmacist’s role, need for system(s) to help in applying deprescribing, and patient counseling/education. Similarly, barriers included lack of knowing the deprescribing term and process, patient comorbidities, risk/fear of conflict between physicians and clinical pharmacists, lack of documentation and communication, lack of time or crowded clinics, and patient resistance/acceptance.

Conclusion

The study identified several factors affecting family medicine physician’s deprescribing behavior. The use of theoretical underpinning design helped to provide a comprehensive range of factors that can be directed when defining targets for intervention(s).

Assessing the ability of the Drug-Associated Risk Tool (DART) questionnaire to stratify hospitalised older patients according to their risk of drug-related problems: a cross-sectional validation study

OBJECTIVES

The Drug-Associated Risk Tool (DART) has been developed as a self-administered questionnaire for patients with the aim of stratifying patients according to their risk of drug-related problems (DRPs). We aimed to validate the ability of the questionnaire to distinguish between hospitalised patients showing lower and higher numbers of DRPs.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study assessing the questionnaire's concurrent criterion validity.

SETTING

Five geriatric and the associated physical and neurological rehabilitation wards of a Swiss regional secondary care hospital with 617 beds.

PARTICIPANTS

We recruited 110 patients from a total of 437 admissions. Exclusion criteria were insufficient knowledge in spoken or written German, medical conditions preventing meaningful conversations and already receiving pharmacy services.

INTERVENTIONS

Comprehensive pharmacist-led clinical medication reviews were performed, including patient interviews, to identify potential and manifest DRPs. A cluster analysis was conducted to assess the discriminatory potential of the DART to group patients according to number (low and high) of identified DRPs. A subsequent discriminatory function analysis was performed to reduce the number of items. We determined which DART items may be used to trigger what type of medication review.

RESULTS

Recruited patients had a median age of 79 years and were prescribed a median of 11 drugs. Patients with a median DART score of 10 and a median of 3 DRPs represented one cluster, whereas patients with a median DART score of 15 and a median of 8 DRPs represented another cluster. Discriminatory function analysis reduced the questionnaire to five items with a moderate to strong correlation with the number of DRPs per patient (Spearman's rank correlation ρ=0.44). Additional items were associated with patients benefiting from interviews.

CONCLUSIONS

As a self-administered questionnaire for patients, the DART may be used to stratify hospitalised non-acute older patients in groups of having low and high likelihood of DRPs. The analyses showed that a short form of the DART can be used instead of the full tool to identify older inpatients at risk for DRPs. Additional eight items from the DART may be used to initiate additional clinical pharmacy services. The linkage between certain DART questions and type of medication review enables pharmacist resource allocation.

Contribution of Patient Interviews as Part of a Comprehensive Approach to the Identification of Drug-Related Problems on Geriatric Wards

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate prescribing is linked to increased risks for adverse drug reactions and hospitalisation. Combining explicit and implicit criteria of inappropriate prescribing with the information obtained in patient interviews seems beneficial with regard to the identification of drug-related problems (DRPs) in hospitalised patients.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the inclusion of pharmacist interviews as part of medication reviews (including the use of explicit and implicit criteria of inappropriate prescribing) to identify DRPs in older inpatients.

METHODS

Clinical medication reviews were performed on geriatric and associated physical and neurological rehabilitation wards in a regional secondary care hospital. Data from electronic medical records, laboratory data, and current treatment regimens were complemented with a novel structured patient interview performed by a clinical pharmacist. The structured interview questioned patients on administration issues, prescribed medication, self-medication, and allergies. The reviews included the use of current treatment guidelines, the Medication Appropriateness Index, the Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions (STOPP, v2), and the Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START, v2). The potential relevance of the DRPs was estimated using the German version of the CLEO tool.

RESULTS

In 110 patients, 595 DRPs were identified, averaging 5.4 per patient (range 0-17). The structured interviews identified 249 DRPs (41.8%), of which 227 were not identified by any other source of information. The majority of DRPs (213/249, i.e. 85.5%) identified by patient interview were estimated to be of minor clinical relevance (i.e. limited adherence, knowledge, quality of life, or satisfaction).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated that structured patient interviews identified additional DRPs that other sources did not identify. Embedded within a comprehensive approach, the structured patient interviews were needed as data resource for over one-third of all DRPs.

Effectiveness of a complex intervention on Prioritising Multimedication in Multimorbidity (PRIMUM) in primary care: results of a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Investigate the effectiveness of a complex intervention aimed at improving the appropriateness of medication in older patients with multimorbidity in general practice.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with general practice as unit of randomisation.

SETTING

72 general practices in Hesse, Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

505 randomly sampled, cognitively intact patients (≥60 years, ≥3 chronic conditions under pharmacological treatment, ≥5 long-term drug prescriptions with systemic effects); 465 patients and 71 practices completed the study.

INTERVENTIONS

Intervention group (IG): The healthcare assistant conducted a checklist-based interview with patients on medication-related problems and reconciled their medications. Assisted by a computerised decision support system, the general practitioner optimised medication, discussed it with patients and adjusted it accordingly. The control group (CG) continued with usual care.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was a modified Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI, excluding item 10 on cost-effectiveness), assessed in blinded medication reviews and calculated as the difference between baseline and after 6 months; secondary outcomes after 6 and 9 months' follow-up: quality of life, functioning, medication adherence, and so on.

RESULTS

At baseline, a high proportion of patients had appropriate to mildly inappropriate prescriptions (MAI 0-5 points: n=350 patients). Randomisation revealed balanced groups (IG: 36 practices/252 patients; CG: 36/253). Intervention had no significant effect on primary outcome: mean MAI sum scores decreased by 0.3 points in IG and 0.8 points in CG, resulting in a non-significant adjusted mean difference of 0.7 (95% CI -0.2 to 1.6) points in favour of CG. Secondary outcomes showed non-significant changes (quality of life slightly improved in IG but continued to decline in CG) or remained stable (functioning, medication adherence).

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention had no significant effects. Many patients already received appropriate prescriptions and enjoyed good quality of life and functional status. We can therefore conclude that in our study, there was not enough scope for improvement.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN99526053. NCT01171339; Results.

Impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care on in-patients' medication safety: study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial (MEDREV study)

Background

Clinical pharmaceutical care has long played an important role in the improvement of healthcare safety. Pharmaceutical care is a collaborative care approach, implicating all the actors of the medication circuit in order to prevent and correct drug-related problems that can lead to adverse drug events. The collaborative pharmaceutical care performed during patients’ hospitalization requires two mutually reinforcing activities: medication reconciliation and medication review. Until now, the impact of the association of these two activities has not been clearly studied.

Methods

This is a multicentric stepped wedge randomized study involving six care units from six French University Hospitals (each unit corresponding to a cluster) over seven consecutive 14-day periods. Each hospital unit will start with a control period and switch to an experimental period after a randomized number of 14-day periods. Patients aged at least 65 years hospitalized in one of the participating care units and having given their consent to be called for a 30-day and 90-day follow-up can be enrolled. For each 14-day period, 15 patients will be recruited in each care unit to obtain a total of 630 patients enrolled in all centers. Patients with a hospital stay of more than 21 days will be excluded. During the control period, there will be no clinical pharmacist in the care unit, whereas during the experimental period a clinical pharmacist will perform medication reconciliation and review with the healthcare team. The primary outcome will assess the impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care on preventable medication error rate. The secondary outcomes will evaluate the clinical impact of the strategy, the acceptance rate of pharmaceutical interventions, the induced and avoided costs of the strategy (cost-consequence analysis), and the healthcare team’s satisfaction.

Discussion

This study will assess the impact of collaborative pharmaceutical care associating medication reconciliation and review at patient admission to hospital in terms of preventable medication error rate and costs. This activity will prevent and correct medication errors arising earlier in the hospitalization.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02598115. Registered on 4 November 2015.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2412-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Assessments of Opportunities to Improve Antibiotic Prescribing in an Emergency Department: A Period Prevalence Survey

Introduction

Approximately 30% of all outpatient antimicrobials are inappropriately prescribed. Currently, antimicrobial prescribing patterns in emergency departments (ED) are not well described. Determining inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing patterns and opportunities for interventions by antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) are needed.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed among a random sample of non-admitted, adult patients who received an antimicrobial prescription in the ED from January 1 to December 31, 2015. Appropriateness was measured using the Medication Appropriateness Index, and was based on provider adherence to local guidelines. Additional information collected included patient characteristics, initial diagnoses, and other chronic medication use.

Results

Of 1579 ED antibiotic prescriptions in 2015, we reviewed a total of 159 (10.1%) prescription records. The most frequently prescribed antimicrobial classes included penicillins (22.6%), macrolides (20.8%), cephalosporins (17.6%), and fluoroquinolones (17.0%). The most common indications for antibiotics were bronchitis or upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) (35.1%), followed by skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) (25.0%), both of which were the most common reason for unnecessary prescribing (28.9% of bronchitis/URTIs, 25.6% of SSTIs). Of the antimicrobial prescriptions reviewed, 39% met criteria for inappropriateness. Among 78 prescriptions with a consensus on appropriate indications, 13.8% had inappropriate dosing, duration, or expense.

Conclusion

Consistent with national outpatient prescribing, inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in the ED occurred in 39% of cases with the highest rates observed among patients with bronchitis, URTI, and SSTI. Antimicrobial stewardship programs may benefit by focusing on initiatives for these conditions among ED patients. Moreover, creation of local guideline pocketbooks for these and other conditions may serve to improve prescribing practices and meet the Core Elements of Outpatient Stewardship recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Utilization and prescribing patterns of direct oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

Scant literature exists evaluating utilization patterns for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs).

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to assess DOAC prescribing in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in outpatient clinics. Secondary objectives were to compare utilization between family medicine (FM) and internal medicine (IM) clinics, characterize potentially inappropriate use, and identify factors associated with adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adults with NVAF or VTE who received a DOAC at FM or IM clinics between 10/19/2010 and 10/23/2014. Descriptive statistics were utilized for the primary aim. Fisher's exact test was used to evaluate differences in prescribing using an adapted medication appropriateness index. Logistic regression evaluated factors associated with inappropriate use and AEs.

RESULTS

One-hundred twenty patients were evaluated. At least 1 inappropriate criterion was met in 72 patients (60.0%). The most frequent inappropriate criteria were dosage (33.0%), duration of therapy (18.4%), and correct administration (18.0%). Apixaban was dosed inappropriately most frequently. There was no difference in dosing appropriateness between FM and IM clinics. The odds of inappropriate choice were lower with apixaban compared to other DOACs (odds ratio [OR]=0.088; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.008-0.964; p=0.047). Twenty-seven patients (22.5%) experienced an AE while on a DOAC, and the odds of bleeding doubled with each inappropriate criterion met (OR=1.949; 95% CI 1.190-3.190; p=0.008).

CONCLUSION

Potentially inappropriate prescribing of DOACs is frequent with the most common errors being dosing, administration, and duration of therapy. These results underscore the importance of prescriber education regarding the appropriate use and management of DOACs.

Pilot study to test the feasibility of a trial design and complex intervention on PRIoritising MUltimedication in Multimorbidity in general practices (PRIMUMpilot)

OBJECTIVE

To improve medication appropriateness and adherence in elderly patients with multimorbidity, we developed a complex intervention involving general practitioners (GPs) and their healthcare assistants (HCA). In accordance with the Medical Research Council guidance on developing and evaluating complex interventions, we prepared for the main study by testing the feasibility of the intervention and study design in a cluster randomised pilot study.

SETTING

20 general practices in Hesse, Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

100 cognitively intact patients ≥65 years with ≥3 chronic conditions, ≥5 chronic prescriptions and capable of participating in telephone interviews; 94 patients completed the study.

INTERVENTION

The HCA conducted a checklist-based interview with patients on medication-related problems and reconciled their medications. Assisted by a computerised decision-support system (CDSS), the GPs discussed medication intake with patients and adjusted their medication regimens. The control group continued with usual care.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility of the intervention and required time were assessed for GPs, HCAs and patients using mixed methods (questionnaires, interviews and case vignettes after completion of the study). The feasibility of the study was assessed concerning success of achieving recruitment targets, balancing cluster sizes and minimising drop-out rates. Exploratory outcomes included the medication appropriateness index (MAI), quality of life, functional status and adherence-related measures. MAI was evaluated blinded to group assignment, and intra-rater/inter-rater reliability was assessed for a subsample of prescriptions.

RESULTS

10 practices were randomised and analysed per group. GPs/HCAs were satisfied with the interventions despite the time required (35/45 min/patient). In case vignettes, GPs/HCAs needed help using the CDSS. The study made no patients feel uneasy. Intra-rater/inter-rater reliability for MAI was excellent. Inclusion criteria were challenging and potentially inadequate, and should therefore be adjusted. Outcome measures on pain, functionality and self-reported adherence were unfeasible due to frequent missing values, an incorrect manual or potentially invalid results.

CONCLUSIONS

Intervention and trial design were feasible. The pilot study revealed important limitations that influenced the design and conduct of the main study, thus highlighting the value of piloting complex interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN99691973; Results.

Priority Setting and Influential Factors on Acceptance of Pharmaceutical Recommendations in Collaborative Medication Reviews in an Ambulatory Care Setting - Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (WestGem-Study)

BACKGROUND

Medication reviews are recognized services to increase quality of therapy and reduce medication risks. The selection of eligible patients with potential to receive a major benefit is based on assumptions rather than on factual data. Acceptance of interprofessional collaboration is crucial to increase the quality of medication therapy.

OBJECTIVE

The research question was to identify and prioritize eligible patients for a medication review and to provide evidence-based criteria for patient selection. Acceptance of the prescribing general practitioner to implement pharmaceutical recommendations was measured and factors influencing physicians' acceptance were explored to obtain an impression on the extent of collaboration in medication review in an ambulatory care setting.

METHODS

Based on data of a cluster-randomized controlled study (WestGem-study), the correlation between patient parameters and the individual performance in a medication review was calculated in a multiple logistic regression model. Physician's acceptance of the suggested intervention was assessed using feedback forms. Influential factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

The number of drugs in use (p = 0.001), discrepancies between prescribed and used medicines (p = 0.014), the baseline Medication Appropriateness Index score (p<0.001) and the duration of the intervention (p = 0.006) could be identified as influential factors for a major benefit from a medication review, whereas morbidity (p>0.05) and a low kidney function (p>0.05) do not predetermine the outcome. Longitudinal patient care with repeated reviews showed higher interprofessional acceptance and superior patient benefit. A total of 54.9% of the recommendations in a medication review on drug therapy were accepted for implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of drugs in use and medication reconciliation could be a first rational step in patient selection for a medication review. Most elderly, multimorbid patients with polymedication experience a similar chance of receiving a benefit from a medication review. Longitudinal patient care should be preferred over confined medication reviews. The acceptance of medication reviews by physicians supports further implementation into health care systems.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN ISRCTN41595373.

Barricades and brickwalls--a qualitative study exploring perceptions of medication use and deprescribing in long-term care

Background

The co-administration of multiple drugs (polypharmacy) is the single most common cause of adverse drug events in the older population, and residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are at particularly high risk of medication harm. ‘Deprescribing’ – the withdrawal of an inappropriate medication with goal of managing polypharmacy and improving outcomes – may improve the quality of life of LTCF residents. The RELEASE study sought to explore perceptions of medication use and the concept of deprescribing in LTCFs.

Methods

Focus groups and interviews were conducted with General Practitioners (GPs), pharmacists, nursing staff, residents and their relatives within three LTCFs in the Illawarra-Shoalhaven region of NSW, Australia. Audiotapes were transcribed verbatim and, using the Integrative Model of Behaviour Prediction as a framework, thematic analysis of transcripts was conducted using QSR NVivo 10.

Results

Participants acknowledged the burden of too many medications (time to administer, physical discomfort, cost), yet displayed passivity towards medication reduction. Residents and relatives lacked understanding of medicine indications or potential harms. Willingness to initiate and accept medication change was dependent on the GP, who emerged as a central trusted figure. GPs preferred ‘the path of least resistance’, signalling systems barriers (poor uniformity of LTCF medical records, limited trained LTCF personnel); time constraints (resident consultations, follow-up with specialists and family); and the organisation of care (collaborating with LTCF staff, pharmacists and prescribing specialists) as obstacles to deprescribing.

Conclusions

Targeted engagement is required to raise awareness of the risks of polypharmacy in LTCFs and encourage acceptance of deprescribing amongst residents and their relatives. GPs are integral to the success of deprescribing initiatives within this sector.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12877-016-0181-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pharmacist-Led Medication Reviews to Identify and Collaboratively Resolve Drug-Related Problems in Psychiatry - A Controlled, Clinical Trial

Aim of the study

This prospective, controlled trial aimed to assess the effect of pharmacist-led medication reviews on the medication safety of psychiatric inpatients by the resolution of Drug-Related Problems (DRP). Both the therapy appropriateness measured with the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and the number of unsolved DRP per patient were chosen as primary outcome measures.

Methods

Depending on their time of admission, 269 psychiatric patients that were admitted to a psychiatric university hospital were allocated in control (09/2012-03/2013) or intervention group (05/2013-12/2013). In both groups, DRP were identified by comprehensive medication reviews by clinical pharmacists at admission, during the hospital stay, and at discharge. In the intervention group, recommendations for identified DRP were compiled by the pharmacists and discussed with the therapeutic team. In the control group, recommendations were not provided except for serious or life threatening DRP. As a primary outcome measure, the changes in therapy appropriateness from admission to discharge as well as from admission to three months after discharge (follow-up) assessed with the MAI were compared between both groups. The second primary outcome was the number of unsolved DRP per patient after completing the study protocol. The DRP type, the relevance and the potential of drugs to cause DRP were also evaluated.

Results

The intervention led to a reduced MAI score by 1.4 points per patient (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.8–2.0) at discharge and 1.3 points (95% CI: 0.7–1.9) at follow-up compared with controls. The number of unsolved DRP in the intervention group was 1.8 (95% CI: 1.5–2.1) less than in control.

Conclusion

The pharmaceutical medication reviews with interdisciplinary discussion of identified DRP appears to be a worthy strategy to improve medication safety in psychiatry as reflected by less unsolved DRP per patient and an enhanced appropriateness of therapy. The promising results of this trial likely warrant further research that evaluates direct clinical outcomes and health-related costs.

Trial Registration

Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (DRKS), DRKS00006358

Instruments for evaluating medication use and prescribing in older adults

OBJECTIVE

To describe primarily implicit instruments for assessing medication use in older adults.

DATA SOURCES

Literature was identified via PubMed (1966-2014) and Google Scholar using the following search terms: geriatric/medication use, implicit criteria, inappropriate medication use, inappropriate prescribing, older adults/medication use, and polypharmacy. Reference citations from identified publications were also reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION

All articles in English identified from data sources were evaluated. Instruments applicable to pharmacy and multiple medication classes were included. We excluded instruments developed for a single medication or medication class, for a single condition or disease state, as primarily an academic instrument, using primarily explicit criteria, for use primarily by health care practitioners other than pharmacists, or for regulatory purposes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Seven instruments were reviewed by evaluating characteristics, components of prescribing and medication use addressed, and settings in which they have been evaluated and validated. Screening Medications in the Older Drug User (SMOG) is a six-question instrument developed specifically for community pharmacists. The Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI); Assess, Review, Minimize, Optimize, Reassess (ARMOR) tool; and Tool to Improve Medications in the Elderly via Review (TIMER) are more comprehensive instruments, but they require clinical judgment and are time intensive. Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders-3 (ACOVE-3) and the Good Palliative-Geriatric Practice Algorithm (GPGPA) are useful in determining need for medication continuation in older adults who are closer to the end of life. The Assessment of Underutilization (AOU) is an implicit tool to guide medication initiation.

CONCLUSION

Each instrument is unique in design, which may be beneficial in some pharmacy practice settings and present barriers in others. The use of multiple instruments may be necessary to optimize therapy in this vulnerable patient population.

The medication appropriateness index at 20: where it started, where it has been, and where it may be going

Potentially inappropriate prescribing for older adults is a major public health concern. While there are multiple measures of potentially inappropriate prescribing, the medication appropriateness index (MAI) is one of the most common implicit approaches published in the scientific literature. The objective of this narrative review is to describe findings regarding the MAI's reliability, comparison of the MAI with other quality measures of potentially inappropriate prescribing, its predictive validity with important health outcomes, and its responsiveness to change within the framework of randomized controlled trials. A search restricted to English-language literature involving humans aged 65+ years from January 1992 to June 2013 was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases using the search term 'medication appropriateness index'. A manual search of the reference lists from identified articles and the authors' article files, book chapters, and recent reviews was conducted to identify additional articles. A total of 26 articles were identified for inclusion in this narrative review. The main findings were that the MAI has acceptable inter- and intra-rater reliability, it more frequently detects potentially inappropriate prescribing than a commonly used set of explicit criteria, it predicts adverse health outcomes, and it is able to demonstrate the positive impact of interventions to improve this public health problem. We conclude that the MAI may serve as a valuable tool for measuring potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults.

Appropriateness of Prescribing Dabigatran Etexilate and Rivaroxaban in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants have been developed to address some of the drawbacks of vitamin-K antagonists. However, special attention should be given when using these drugs, especially in patients with renal insufficiency, questionable compliance, and those at high risk of bleeding. Objective: To evaluate the appropriateness of prescribing dabigatran etexilate (DE) and rivaroxaban in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in real-life clinical practice. Methods: This was a prospective study that included patients presenting to a teaching hospital from April to mid-October 2013, who were taking rivaroxaban or DE for NVAF. Appropriateness of prescribing was evaluated using 9 of the 10 criteria of the Medication Appropriateness Index. The primary outcome measure was the prevalence of inappropriate prescribing. Secondary outcome measures included ( a) categories of inappropriateness, ( b) prevalence of adverse drug events, and ( c) interventions made by a clinical pharmacist to optimize prescribing. Results: A total of 69 patients were evaluated; 16 patients (23%) had 1 inappropriate criterion, and an additional 18 (26%) had more than 1 inappropriate criterion. The most frequent inappropriate criteria were inappropriate choice (28% of patients), wrong dosage (26%), and impractical modalities of administration (26%). An adverse event (AE) was found in 51% of patients (including 8 patients with transient ischemic attack/stroke). The clinical pharmacists performed 48 interventions, and 94% were accepted by the physician. Conclusions: Inappropriate use of DE and rivaroxaban in patients with NVAF is frequent and possibly leads to AEs. Reinforcing education of health care professionals and patients is needed. Collaboration with clinical pharmacists can contribute to better use.

Collaborative pharmaceutical care in an Irish hospital: uncontrolled before-after study

BACKGROUND

We investigated the benefits of the Collaborative Pharmaceutical Care in Tallaght Hospital (PACT) service versus standard ward-based clinical pharmacy in adult inpatients receiving acute medical care, particularly on prevalence of medication error and quality of prescribing.

METHODS

Uncontrolled before-after study, undertaken in consecutive adult medical inpatients admitted and discharged alive, using at least three medications. Standard care involved clinical pharmacists being ward-based, contributing to medication history taking and prescription review, but not involved at discharge. The innovative PACT intervention involved clinical pharmacists being team-based, leading admission and discharge medication reconciliation and undertaking prescription review. Primary outcome measures were prevalence per patient of medication error and potentially severe error. Secondary measures included quality of prescribing using the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) in patients aged ≥65 years.

FINDINGS

Some 233 patients (112 PACT, 121 standard) were included. PACT decreased the prevalence of any medication error at discharge (adjusted OR 0.07 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.15)); number needed to treat (NNT) 3 (95% CI 2 to 3) and no PACT patient experienced a potentially severe error (NNT 20, 95% CI 10 to 142). In patients aged ≥65 years (n=108), PACT improved the MAI score from preadmission to discharge (Mann-Whitney U p<0.05; PACT median -1, IQR -3.75 to 0; standard care median +1, IQR -1 to +6).

CONCLUSIONS

PACT, a collaborative model of pharmaceutical care involving medication reconciliation and review, delivered by clinical pharmacists and physicians, at admission, during inpatient care and at discharge was protective against potentially severe medication errors in acute medical patients and improved the quality of prescribing in older patients.

Inappropriate medication prescriptions in elderly adults surviving an intensive care unit hospitalization

OBJECTIVES

To determine types of potentially (PIMs) and actually inappropriate medications (AIMs), which PIMs are most likely to be considered AIMs, and risk factors for PIMs and AIMs at hospital discharge in elderly intensive care unit (ICU) survivors.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care, academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred twenty individuals aged 60 and older who survived an ICU hospitalization.

MEASUREMENTS

Potentially inappropriate medications were defined according to published criteria; a multidisciplinary panel adjudicated AIMs. Medications from before admission, ward admission, ICU admission, ICU discharge, and hospital discharge were abstracted. Poisson regression was used to examine independent risk factors for hospital discharge PIMs and AIMs.

RESULTS

Of 250 PIMs prescribed at discharge, the most common were opioids (28%), anticholinergics (24%), antidepressants (12%), and drugs causing orthostasis (8%). The three most common AIMs were anticholinergics (37%), nonbenzodiazepine hypnotics (14%), and opioids (12%). Overall, 36% of discharge PIMs were classified as AIMs, but the percentage varied according to drug type. Whereas only 16% of opioids, 23% of antidepressants, and 10% of drugs causing orthostasis were classified as AIMs, 55% of anticholinergics, 71% of atypical antipyschotics, 67% of nonbenzodiazepine hypnotics and benzodiazepines, and 100% of muscle relaxants were deemed AIMs. The majority of PIMs and AIMs were first prescribed in the ICU. Preadmission PIMs, discharge to somewhere other than home, and discharge from a surgical service predicted number of discharge PIMs, but none of the factors predicted AIMs at discharge.

CONCLUSION

Certain types of PIMs, which are commonly initiated in the ICU, are more frequently considered inappropriate upon clinical review. Efforts to reduce AIMs in elderly ICU survivors should target these specific classes of medications.

Content validity and inter-rater reliability of an instrument to characterize unintentional medication discrepancies

BACKGROUND

Medication discrepancies are medication-related problems (MRPs) that frequently occur when patients are transferred between settings of care. Older patients are at high risk for several reasons, including high consumption of medicines, and physical and cognitive deficiencies that can impair the communication process. Most previous studies that have evaluated medication discrepancies used instruments designed for clinical practice, but a well-validated and reliable instrument for clinical research is still lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to (i) develop an instrument to characterize medication discrepancies that fulfils quality requirements for classification of MRPs related to continuity of care and (ii) assess its content validity and inter-rater reliability.

METHODS

The instrument was developed based on three main inputs: (i) a literature review to collect information about the quality requirements of instruments to characterize MRPs; (ii) another literature review to identify existing instruments to characterize MRPs and, more specifically, medication discrepancies; and (iii) previous experience from a pilot study on Belgian patients discharged from surgical and medical wards. Content validity was assessed using a modified Delphi technique with 11 healthcare professionals. Content validity indexes were calculated. For inter-rater reliability, three pharmacists (one experienced and two naive) were asked to identify and categorize (type and cause of) unintentional medication discrepancies for 21 patients discharged from hospital into the community. The intra-class correlation coefficient was calculated to compare the number of discrepancies identified, and a paradox-resistant index (AC1) was used to determine the inter-rater reliability for the type and cause of the discrepancy.

RESULTS

The instrument had 54 items classified in three sections (type of discrepancy, cause and intervention), with detailed specifications on how to use it. All evaluations relative to content validity met predefined cut-off values, except for two of them. Intra-class correlation coefficients of ≥0.76 and AC1 coefficients of ≥0.89 were found for the number and the type of discrepancies, respectively. Regarding evaluation of the specific causes of medication discrepancies, final AC1 results of ≥0.86 were obtained, except for three items (which had values between 0.62 and 0.79).

CONCLUSION

The validity and reliability of the instrument developed to assess unintentional medication discrepancies at patient transition from the hospital to the community setting was found to be satisfactory.

[Suitability of pharmacological treatment in patients with multiple chronic conditions]

OBJECTIVE

To identify tools for measuring the appropriateness of drug therapy useful in patients with multiple chronic conditions.

DESIGN

We performed a literature review.

DATA SOURCES

The following database were consulted (December 2009): Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Spanish Medical Index (IME) to detect tools for measuring the appropriateness of treatment in patients with multiple chronic conditions, or otherwise elderly or polypharmacy.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were identified both qualitative and quantitative methodology, both theoretical and field work, both original and revised work and included work from all areas of the health system. 108 articles were retrieved, of which we selected 59. The consultation of their references include 20 jobs allowed, resulting in a total of 59 articles.

DATA EXTRACTION

Of all the tools identified, the researchers performed a selection of those with possible utility for classified PP. The articles were classified into implicit and explicit methods and the characteristics of the field works were tabulated.

RESULTS

We identified two implicit methods (MAI and Hamdy) and 6 explicit methods (Beers criteria, IPET, STOPP/START, ACOVE, CRIME and NORGEP). None was specific to patients with multiple chronic conditions. The questionnaire MAI, the Beers criteria and its modifications are most often used in literature. The advantages of explicit criteria means that many of them have been developed recently.

CONCLUSION

There are several tools to measure the appropriateness and none of them has been designed for a population of patients with multiple chronic conditions yet, which by its nature requires a specific approach spreads.

Polypharmacy and the role of physical medicine and rehabilitation

Polypharmacy and inappropriate prescribing practices lead to higher rates of mortality and morbidity, particularly in vulnerable populations, such as the elderly and those with complex medical conditions. Physical medicine and physiatrists face particular challenges given the array of symptoms treated across a spectrum of conditions. This clinical review focuses on polypharmacy and the associated issue of potentially inappropriate prescribing. The article begins with a review of polypharmacy along with relevant aspects of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in the elderly. The adverse effects and potential hazards of selected medications commonly initiated and managed by rehabilitation specialists are then discussed with specific attention to pain medications, neurostimulants, antipsychotics, antidepressants, antispasmodics, sleep medications, and antiepileptics. Of particular concern is the notion that an adverse effect of one medication can mimic an indication for another and lead to a prescribing cascade and further adverse medication events. Appropriate prescribing practices mandate an accurate, current medication list, yet errors and inaccuracies often plague such lists. The evidence to support explicit (medications to avoid) and implicit (how to evaluate) criteria is presented along with the role of physicians and patients in prescribing medications. A brief discussion of "medication debridement" or de-prescribing strategies follows. In the last section, we draw on the essence of physiatry as a team-based endeavor to discuss the potential benefits of collaboration. In working to optimize medication prescribing, efforts should be made to collaborate not only with pharmacists and other medical specialties but with members of inpatient rehabilitation teams as well.

Applicability of an adapted medication appropriateness index for detection of drug-related problems in geriatric inpatients

BACKGROUND

High drug consumption by older patients and the presence of many drug-related problems require careful assessment of drug therapy, for which a structured approach is recommended.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the applicability of an adapted version of the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) in 50 geriatric inpatients at the time of admission.

METHODS

We reviewed, for 432 prescribed drugs, indication, right choice, dosage, directions, drug-disease interactions, drug-drug interactions, and duration of therapy. In addition, adverse drug reactions were evaluated, resulting in 8 questions per drug. MAI scores were attributed independently by a geriatrician and by a clinical pharmacist, and differences between them were assessed. Furthermore, the relationship between MAI score and drug-related hospital admission was explored.

RESULTS

Mean summed MAI scores of 13.7 according to the geriatrician and 13.6 according to the pharmacist were obtained. The highest scores were found for drugs for the central nervous and the urinary tract system; the highest scores per question were detected for right choice, adverse drug reactions, and drug-drug interactions. A good agreement between the scores of the geriatrician and the pharmacist was found: intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.91 and overall κ value was 0.71. A significantly higher MAI score was found for drug-related hospital admissions (P = 0.04 for the geriatrician and P = 0.03 for the pharmacist).

CONCLUSIONS

This adapted MAI score seems useful for detection of drug-related problems in geriatric inpatients and reliable with a low inter-rater variability and positive correlation between high score and drug-related hospital admission. We consider further application of the adapted MAI for teaching and training of clinical pharmacists, and as a systematic approach for detection of drug-related problems by the clinical pharmacists in our hospital.

Prevention of potentially inappropriate prescribing for elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial using STOPP/START criteria

Inappropriate prescribing is particularly common in older patients and is associated with adverse drug events (ADEs), hospitalization, and wasteful utilization of resources. We randomized 400 hospitalized patients aged ≥ 65 years to receive either the usual pharmaceutical care (control) or screening with STOPP/START criteria followed up with recommendations to their attending physicians (intervention). The Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and Assessment of Underutilization (AOU) index were used to assess prescribing appropriateness, both at the time of discharge and for 6 months after discharge. Unnecessary polypharmacy, the use of drugs at incorrect doses, and potential drug-drug and drug-disease interactions were significantly lower in the intervention group at discharge (absolute risk reduction 35.7%, number needed to screen to yield improvement in MAI = 2.8 (95% confidence interval 2.2-3.8)). Underutilization of clinically indicated medications was also reduced (absolute risk reduction 21.2%, number needed to screen to yield reduction in AOU = 4.7 (95% confidence interval 3.4-7.5)). Significant improvements in prescribing appropriateness were sustained for 6 months after discharge.

Quality of drug prescribing in older patients: is there a problem and can we improve it?

Older patients are at high risk of suboptimal prescribing (overuse, underuse and misuse of drugs), which can lead to serious adverse drug reactions (ADR). About one in four patients admitted to hospital are prescribed at least one inappropriate medication and up to 20% of all inpatient deaths are attributed to potentially preventable ADR. Lists of drugs to avoid (unnecessary or where risks outweigh benefits) and drugs not to be omitted (strong indications if there are no contraindications) can assist in identifying suboptimal prescribing although, to date, no trials have established the ability of such screening, by itself, to improve prescribing quality. Remedial strategies proven to be effective in randomized trials include detailed appraisal of medication lists by multidisciplinary teams, which involve geriatricians and close liaison with specialist clinical pharmacists. A multifaceted quality improvement strategy is proposed that includes an aspirational target of no more than five different drugs be regularly prescribed to vulnerable older patients. Achieving this target involves prioritizing drug selection on the basis of strength of indication which may run counter to current disease-specific clinical guideline recommendations based on trials that have excluded most older patients. Such a strategy is worthy of further evaluation in a multicentre randomized trial.

Development and validation of a new Prescription Quality Index

AIMS

The aims were to develop and validate a new Prescription Quality Index (PQI) for the measurement of prescription quality in chronic diseases.

METHODS

The PQI were developed and validated based on three separate surveys and one pilot study. Criteria were developed based on literature search, discussions and brainstorming sessions. Validity of the criteria was examined using modified Delphi method. Pre-testing was performed on 30 patients suffering from chronic diseases. The modified version was then subjected to reviews by pharmacists and clinicians in two separate surveys. The rater-based PQI with 22 criteria was then piloted in 120 patients with chronic illnesses. Results were analysed using SPSS version 12.0.1

RESULTS

Exploratory principal components analysis revealed multiple factors contributing to prescription quality. Cronbach's α for the entire 22 criteria was 0.60. The average intra-rater and inter-rater reliability showed good to moderate stability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.76 and 0.52, respectively). The PQI was significantly and negatively correlated with age (correlation coefficient -0.34, P<0.001), number of drugs in prescriptions (correlation coefficient -0.51, P<0.001) and number of chronic diseases/conditions (correlation coefficient -0.35, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The PQI is a promising new instrument for measuring prescription quality. It has been shown that the PQI is a valid, reliable and responsive tool to measure quality of prescription in chronic diseases.

Impact of the Lund Integrated Medicines Management (LIMM) model on medication appropriateness and drug-related hospital revisits

PURPOSE

To examine the impact of systematic medication reconciliations upon hospital admission and of a medication review while in hospital on the number of inappropriate medications and unscheduled drug-related hospital revisits in elderly patients.

METHODS

This was a prospective, controlled study in 210 patients, aged 65 years or older, who were admitted to one of three internal medicine wards at a University Hospital in Sweden. Intervention patients received the complete Lund Integrated Medicines Management model (medication reconciliation upon admission and discharge, and medication review and monitoring) provided by a multi-professional team, including a clinical pharmacist. Control patients received standard care and medication reconciliation upon discharge. Blinded reviewers evaluated the appropriateness of the prescribing (using the Medication Appropriateness Index) on admission and discharge, and assessed the probability that a drug-related problem was the reason for any patient readmitted to hospital or visiting the emergency department within 3 months of discharge (using World Health Organisation causality criteria).

RESULTS

There was a greater decrease in the number of inappropriate drugs in the intervention group than in the control group for both the intention-to-treat population {51% [95% confidence interval (CI) 43-58%] vs. 39% (95% CI 30-48%); p = 0.0446} and the per-protocol population [60% (95% CI 51-67%) vs. 44% (95% CI 34-52%); p = 0.0106)]. There were six revisits to hospital in the intervention group which were judged as 'possibly, probably or certainly drug-related', compared with 12 in the control group (p = 0.0469).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, medication reconciliation and review provided by a clinical pharmacist in a multi-professional team significantly reduced the number of inappropriate drugs and unscheduled drug-related hospital revisits among elderly patients.

A multi-intervention approach on drug therapy can lead to a more appropriate drug use in the elderly. LIMM-Landskrona Integrated Medicines Management

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate if an integrated medicines management can lead to a more appropriate drug use in elderly inpatients.

METHOD

The study was an intervention study at a department of internal medicine in southern Sweden. During the intervention period pharmacists took part in the daily work at the wards. Systematic interventions aiming to identify, solve and prevent drug-related problems (DRPs) were performed during the patient's hospital stay by multidisciplinary teams consisting of physicians, nurses and pharmacists. DRPs identified by the pharmacist were put forward to the care team and discussed. Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) was used to evaluate the appropriateness in the patients' drug treatment at admission, discharge and 2 weeks after discharge. In total 43 patients were included, 28 patients in the intervention group and 25 patients in the group which was used as control.

RESULTS

For the intervention group there was a significant decrease in the number of inappropriate drugs compared with the control group (P = 0.049). Indication, duration and expenses were the MAI-dimensions with most inappropriate ratings, and the drugs with most inappropriate ratings were anxiolytics, hypnotics and sedatives.

CONCLUSION

This kind of systematic approach on drug therapy can result in a more appropriate drug use in the elderly.

Impact of a geriatric nursing home palliative care service on unnecessary medication prescribing

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of studies concerning improvement of medication use in palliative care patients in nursing homes.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to evaluate whether a geriatric palliative care team reduced unnecessary medication prescribing for elderly veterans residing in a nursing home.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, descriptive study of patients who died while residing in a geriatric palliative care unit between August 1, 2005, and July 31, 2007. Prescribed medications were evaluated using the Unnecessary Drug Use Measure, which contains 3 items from the Medication Appropriateness Index concerning lack of indication, lack of effectiveness, and therapeutic duplication. This measure was applied at 2 time points: on transfer/admission to the palliative care unit and at the last 30-day pharmacist medication review before death. Paired t tests and McNemar tests were used to compare medication use at these 2 points.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients were included in the study. The majority were male (97.8%) and white (78.7%), with a mean (SD) age of 79.7 (7.8) years. The median length of stay on the unit was 39.0 days, and the mean number of chronic medical conditions was 8.4 (4.3). At baseline, the mean number of scheduled medications was 9.7 (4.3). The number of unnecessary medications per patient decreased from a mean of 1.7 (1.5) at admission to 0.6 (0.8) at closeout (P = 0.003). The decrease was seen in all 3 categories of the Unnecessary Drug Use Measure.

CONCLUSIONS

The geriatric palliative care team was associated with a reduction in the number of unnecessary medications prescribed for older veterans in this nursing home. Future studies should evaluate the impact of decreasing unnecessary prescribing on clinical outcomes such as adverse drug reactions.

Reliability of the medication appropriateness index in Dutch residential home

OBJECTIVE

To validate the reliability of the Medication Appropriateness Index in the appraisal of quality of prescribing by assessing the inter- and intra-group variation in Dutch residential home patients.

SETTING AND METHOD

Eight raters evaluated 81 medication records of 15 patients from a group of older patients living in a residential nursing home The Netherlands. These patients had been recruited for a medication review investigation throughout a period of 12 months over the period April 2003 until April 2004. Patient information was acquired by connecting the medical record with the complete prescription record and pharmaceutical record. Each patient was assessed twice by two independent reviewers on the basis of a patient profile in combination with the extracted medical record and using a structured procedure.

MAIN OUTCOME

A summed MAI score, percent agreement, kappa, positive and negative agreement as well as intra-class correlation coefficient were calculated for each criterion.

MEASURE

Medication appropriateness was assessed with the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) by an independent panel of Dutch hospital and community pharmacists.

RESULTS

The overall percentage agreement was 83%. For each of the 10 different medication appropriateness questions it ranged from 79 to 100% for appropriate and from 47 to 60% for inappropriate ratings. The overall chance adjusted inter-rater agreement reached a moderate kappa score of 0.47. The overall intra-group agreement was very good with an overall percentage of 98 and a kappa score of at least 0.84 (all schemes).

CONCLUSION

In a Dutch institutionalised setting with representative raters, the unmodified MAI can be used as an instrument to quantify changes in appropriateness of prescribing.

Appropriate prescribing in elderly people: how well can it be measured and optimised?

Prescription of medicines is a fundamental component of the care of elderly people, and optimisation of drug prescribing for this group of patients has become an important public-health issue worldwide. Several characteristics of ageing and geriatric medicine affect medication prescribing for elderly people and render the selection of appropriate pharmacotherapy a challenging and complex process. In the first paper in this series we aim to define and categorise appropriate prescribing in elderly people, critically review the instruments that are available to measure it and discuss their predictive validity, critically review recent randomised controlled intervention studies that assessed the effect of optimisation strategies on the appropriateness of prescribing in elderly people, and suggest directions for future research and practice.

Epidemiology of medication-related adverse events in nursing homes

BACKGROUND

Nursing home residents are prescribed more medications than patients in any other clinical setting. Although pharmacotherapy for older nursing home residents is usually safe and effective, it can lead to medication-related adverse events such as adverse drug reactions (ADRs), adverse drug withdrawal events (ADWEs), and therapeutic failures (TFs).

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews the descriptive (incidence) and analytic (risk factor) epidemiology of medication-related adverse events occurring in nursing home residents as reported in the literature during the last 2 decades.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts was conducted for articles published in English between January 1986 and July 2006 using the following terms: adverse drug events, adverse drug reactions, adverse drug withdrawal events, aged, drug therapy, drug-related problems, medication-related problems, nursing homes, therapeutic failures, and treatment failures. The reference lists of identified articles, recent review articles, book chapters, and the authors' reference library were also searched manually.

RESULTS

Seven studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were included in this review. Five studies described ADRs, 1 described ADWEs, and 1 described TFs. The studies of ADRs used different methods of detecting ADRs, resulting in incidence rates ranging from 1.19 to 7.26 per 100 resident-months. The single study of ADWEs reported an incidence of 2.60 per 100 resident-months. An incidence rate for the single study describing TFs could not be calculated.

CONCLUSIONS

Medication-related adverse events are common in the nursing home setting. Additional studies are needed to enhance the detection and prevention of medication-related adverse events and to reduce their impact on residents' outcomes and health care costs.