1
|
Cole JA, Gonçalves-Bradley DC, Alqahtani M, Barry HE, Cadogan C, Rankin A, Patterson SM, Kerse N, Cardwell CR, Ryan C, Hughes C. Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 10:CD008165. [PMID: 37818791 PMCID: PMC10565901 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008165.pub5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, so that many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients. This is the third update of this Cochrane Review. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of interventions, alone or in combination, in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers up until 13 January 2021, together with handsearching of reference lists to identify additional studies. We ran updated searches in February 2023 and have added potentially eligible studies to 'Characteristics of studies awaiting classification'. SELECTION CRITERIA For this update, we included randomised trials only. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy (four or more medicines) in people aged 65 years and older, which used a validated tool to assess prescribing appropriateness. These tools can be classified as either implicit tools (judgement-based/based on expert professional judgement) or explicit tools (criterion-based, comprising lists of drugs to be avoided in older people). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Four review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, and two authors extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We pooled study-specific estimates, and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS We identified 38 studies, which includes an additional 10 in this update. The included studies consisted of 24 randomised trials and 14 cluster-randomised trials. Thirty-six studies examined complex, multi-faceted interventions of pharmaceutical care (i.e. the responsible provision of medicines to improve patients' outcomes), in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals such as general physicians, pharmacists, nurses and geriatricians, and most were conducted in high-income countries. Assessments using the Cochrane risk of bias tool found that there was a high and/or unclear risk of bias across a number of domains. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall certainty of evidence for each pooled outcome ranged from low to very low. It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care improves medication appropriateness (as measured by an implicit tool) (mean difference (MD) -5.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.26 to -2.06; I2 = 97%; 8 studies, 947 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.05; I2 = 67%; 9 studies, 2404 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PIM (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98; I2 = 84%; 13 studies, 4534 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may slightly reduce the number of potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) (SMD -0.48, 95% CI -1.05 to 0.09; I2 = 92%; 3 studies, 691 participants; low-certainty evidence), however it must be noted that this effect estimate is based on only three studies, which had serious limitations in terms of risk of bias. Likewise, it is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PPO (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.91; I2 = 95%; 7 studies, 2765 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference to hospital admissions (data not pooled; 14 studies, 4797 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference to quality of life (data not pooled; 16 studies, 7458 participants; low-certainty evidence). Medication-related problems were reported in 10 studies (6740 participants) using different terms (e.g. adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions). No consistent intervention effect on medication-related problems was noted across studies. This also applied to studies examining adherence to medication (nine studies, 3848 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy resulted in clinically significant improvement. Since the last update of this review in 2018, there appears to have been an increase in the number of studies seeking to address potential prescribing omissions and more interventions being delivered by multidisciplinary teams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Judith A Cole
- Clinical Trial Service Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | | | | | - Cathal Cadogan
- School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Audrey Rankin
- School of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | | | - Ngaire Kerse
- Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Chris R Cardwell
- Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Cristin Ryan
- School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Carmel Hughes
- School of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bülow C, Clausen SS, Lundh A, Christensen M. Medication review in hospitalised patients to reduce morbidity and mortality. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 1:CD008986. [PMID: 36688482 PMCID: PMC9869657 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008986.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A medication review can be defined as a structured evaluation of a patient's medication conducted by healthcare professionals with the aim of optimising medication use and improving health outcomes. Optimising medication therapy though medication reviews may benefit hospitalised patients. OBJECTIVES We examined the effects of medication review interventions in hospitalised adult patients compared to standard care or to other types of medication reviews on all-cause mortality, hospital readmissions, emergency department contacts and health-related quality of life. SEARCH METHODS In this Cochrane Review update, we searched for new published and unpublished trials using the following electronic databases from 1 January 2014 to 17 January 2022 without language restrictions: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). To identify additional trials, we searched the reference lists of included trials and other publications by lead trial authors, and contacted experts. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised trials of medication reviews delivered by healthcare professionals for hospitalised adult patients. We excluded trials including outpatients and paediatric patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for data clarification and relevant unpublished data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous data (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the overall certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS In this updated review, we included a total of 25 trials (15,076 participants), of which 15 were new trials (11,501 participants). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 20 months. We found that medication reviews in hospitalised adults may have little to no effect on mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05; 18 trials, 10,108 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce hospital readmissions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 17 trials, 9561 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce emergency department contacts (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.03; 8 trials, 3527 participants; low-certainty evidence) and have very uncertain effects on health-related quality of life (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.30; 4 trials, 392 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Medication reviews in hospitalised adult patients likely reduce hospital readmissions and may reduce emergency department contacts. The evidence suggests that mediation reviews may have little to no effect on mortality, while the effect on health-related quality of life is very uncertain. Almost all trials included elderly polypharmacy patients, which limits the generalisability of the results beyond this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cille Bülow
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Stine Søndersted Clausen
- The Research Unit for General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Andreas Lundh
- Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO) and Cochrane Denmark, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Respiratory Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Copenhagen University Hospital - Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Mikkel Christensen
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Copenhagen Center for Translational Research (CCTR), Copenhagen University Hospital - Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Discharge planning is a routine feature of health systems in many countries that aims to reduce delayed discharge from hospital, and improve the co-ordination of services following discharge from hospital and reduce the risk of hospital readmission. This is the fifth update of the original review. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of planning the discharge of individual patients moving from hospital. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two trials registers on 20 April 2021. We searched two other databases up to 31 March 2020. We also conducted reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised trials that compared an individualised discharge plan with routine discharge that was not tailored to individual participants. Participants were hospital inpatients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently undertook data analysis and quality assessment using a pre-designed data extraction sheet. We grouped studies by older people with a medical condition, people recovering from surgery, and studies that recruited participants with a mix of conditions. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data using fixed-effect meta-analysis. When combining outcome data it was not possible because of differences in the reporting of outcomes, we summarised the reported results for each trial in the text. MAIN RESULTS We included 33 trials (12,242 participants), four new trials included in this update. The majority of trials (N = 30) recruited participants with a medical diagnosis, average age range 60 to 84 years; four of these trials also recruited participants who were in hospital for a surgical procedure. Participants allocated to discharge planning and who were in hospital for a medical condition had a small reduction in the initial hospital length of stay (MD - 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 1.33 to - 0.12; 11 trials, 2113 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and a relative reduction in readmission to hospital over an average of three months follow-up (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.97; 17 trials, 5126 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was little or no difference in participant's health status (mortality at three- to nine-month follow-up: RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.29; 8 trials, 2721 participants; moderate certainty) functional status and psychological health measured by a range of measures, 12 studies, 2927 participants; low certainty evidence). There was some evidence that satisfaction might be increased for patients (7 trials), caregivers (1 trial) or healthcare professionals (2 trials) (very low certainty evidence). The cost of a structured discharge plan compared with routine discharge is uncertain (7 trials recruiting 7873 participants with a medical condition; very low certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS A structured discharge plan that is tailored to the individual patient probably brings about a small reduction in the initial hospital length of stay and readmissions to hospital for older people with a medical condition, may slightly increase patient satisfaction with healthcare received. The impact on patient health status and healthcare resource use or cost to the health service is uncertain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela C Gonçalves-Bradley
- Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS), Porto, Portugal
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Natasha A Lannin
- Brain Recovery and Rehabilitation Group, Department of Neuroscience, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Lindy Clemson
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Ian D Cameron
- John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Sydney Medical School, Northern Clinical School, The University of Sydney, St Leonards, Australia
| | - Sasha Shepperd
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shang J, Ning W, Gong J, Su D, Jia X, Wang Y. Impact of clinical pharmacist services on anticoagulation management of total joint arthroplasty: A retrospective observational study. J Clin Pharm Ther 2021; 46:1301-1307. [PMID: 33904165 DOI: 10.1111/jcpt.13428] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2021] [Revised: 03/08/2021] [Accepted: 03/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE Even if total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients have received conventional antithrombotic therapy, the incidence of thrombosis remains high. Clinical pharmacists have been involved in the multidisciplinary team of orthopaedics, but their roles and functions are not yet defined. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of clinical pharmacist services on the use of anticoagulant drugs, the rationality of medication and the incidence of thrombosis in patients with TJA. METHODS This retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted for patients undergoing TJA procedures. Study variables were collected for a baseline period of 1 January 2016 to 30 June 2017 and an intervention period of 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2019, allowing for a 6-month run-in period. For demographic characteristics, the use of anticoagulant drugs and the incidence of thrombosis between the baseline and intervention periods, the data were statistically analysed. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION During the 36-month study timeframe, a total of 591 TJA procedures were performed. A total of 577 participants were included in the study (240 in the baseline group and 377 in the intervention group). After clinical pharmacist participation, the prevention rate of anticoagulant drugs (p < 0.05), the proportion of oral anticoagulants (p = 0.000) and the course of preventive treatment (p = 0.004) increased significantly. The time of administration was shortened from after 24 h to within 24 h post-surgery (p = 0.000). Although the incidence of symptomatic DVT reduced in the intervention period, there was no statistical difference in either the hospital, 1-month follow-up, or 3-month follow-up after surgery (all p > 0.05). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION Within the limitations of a retrospective study, clinical pharmacist intervention was associated with improvements in anticoagulation management of TJA procedures, likely conferring beneficial effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jingjing Shang
- Department of Pharmacy, The Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
| | - Wei Ning
- Department of Pharmacy, Hunan Provincial Peoples' Hospital, Changsha, China
| | - Jinhong Gong
- Department of Pharmacy, The Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
| | - Dan Su
- Department of Pharmacy, The Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
| | - Xiaojun Jia
- Department of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
| | - Yuji Wang
- Department of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Xie C, Mu X, Hu Z, Wang W, Huang W, Huang G, Wang C, Yin D. Impact of pharmaceutical care in the orthopaedic department. J Clin Pharm Ther 2019; 45:401-407. [PMID: 31800132 DOI: 10.1111/jcpt.13091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2019] [Accepted: 11/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE In the mid-1960s, clinical pharmacy developed in the USA, and as the demand for pharmaceutical services continued to grow, their impact began to be taken seriously. However, the participation of clinical pharmacists as members of the multidisciplinary team in the orthopaedic department is still in its infancy, although its role in orthopaedics has not been defined. The object of this study was to identify and discuss the impact of pharmaceutical care in the orthopaedic department. METHODS A literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) for papers published between 1998 and 2019, using the keywords pharmacy, pharmacist, and medication or drug combined with orthopaedic. Other available resources were also used to identify relevant articles. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Based on the available evidence in 74 articles, it was found that clinical pharmacists play an important role in all aspects of rational use of medications, medication review and reconciliation, monitoring adverse drug events, risk assessment, and medication education and counselling. In addition, clinical pharmacy services were developed to minimize medication errors, adverse drug events and medical costs, but clinical pharmacy is still in its early stages in orthopaedics. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION A multidisciplinary approach should be adopted in the orthopaedic department, as pharmacist interventions can be vital for promoting the safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapy. Although pharmacists' contributions to orthopaedics are not yet fully recognized, pharmaceutical services can undoubtedly contribute to both clinical and societal outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chengxin Xie
- Faculty of Graduate Studies, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China
| | - Xiaoping Mu
- Department of Orthopedics, The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, China
| | - Zhuangming Hu
- Faculty of Nursing, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China
| | - Wei Wang
- Faculty of Graduate Studies, Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, Nanning, China
| | - Wenwen Huang
- Department of Orthopedics, The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, China
| | - Ge Huang
- Department of Orthopedics, The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, China
| | - Chenglong Wang
- Department of Orthopedics, The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, China
| | - Dong Yin
- Department of Orthopedics, The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, China
| |
Collapse
|