Oral prednisolone and warfarin and risk of oesophageal cancer: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

A recent epidemiological study systematically screened 250 prescription medications for associations with oesophageal cancer risk, using Scottish data, and identified an increased risk with use of prednisolone and warfarin. We investigated whether oral prednisolone or warfarin use was associated with increased oesophageal cancer risk.

METHODS

A case-control study was conducted within the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. In the primary analysis oesophageal cancer cases were identified from linked cancer registry records. Up to 5 cancer-free controls were matched to each case (based upon sex, birth year, GP practice and year of GP registration). Prednisolone and warfarin medications were identified from prescribing records. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using conditional logistic regression after adjusting for covariates including demographics, comorbidities and medication use.

RESULTS

There were 4552 oesophageal cancer cases and 22,601 matched control participants. Overall, there was no evidence of an increased risk of oesophageal cancer with oral prednisolone use (unadjusted OR=1.16 95% CI 1.06, 1.27 and adjusted OR=0.99 95% CI 0.89, 1.11) or warfarin use (unadjusted OR=1.12 95% CI 0.99, 1.28 and adjusted OR=1.08 95% CI 0.92, 1.27).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large population-based study, oral prednisolone and warfarin were not associated with oesophageal cancer risk.

'I think we could probably do more': an interview study to explore community pharmacists' experiences and perspectives of frailty and optimising medicines use in frail older adults

BACKGROUND

Community pharmacists potentially have an important role to play in identification of frailty and delivery of interventions to optimise medicines use for frail older adults. However, little is known about their knowledge or views about this role.

AIM

To explore community pharmacists' knowledge of frailty and assessment, experiences and contact with frail older adults, and perceptions of their role in optimising medicines use for this population.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews conducted between March and December 2020 with 15 community pharmacists in Northern Ireland. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Three broad themes were generated from the data. The first, 'awareness and understanding of frailty', highlighted gaps in community pharmacists' knowledge regarding presentation and identification of frailty and their reluctance to broach potentially challenging conversations with frail older patients. Within the second theme, 'problem-solving and supporting medication use', community pharmacists felt a large part of their role was to resolve medicines-related issues for frail older adults through collaboration with other primary healthcare professionals but feedback on the outcome was often not provided upon issue resolution. The third theme, 'seizing opportunities in primary care to enhance pharmaceutical care provision for frail older adults', identified areas for further development of the community pharmacist role.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has provided an understanding of the views and experiences of community pharmacists about frailty. Community pharmacists' knowledge deficits about frailty must be addressed and their communication skills enhanced so they may confidently initiate conversations about frailty and medicines use with older adults.

Improving medication dispensing and counselling for patients with vision impairment: a qualitative study of pharmacist-reported barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

People with vision impairment encounter many difficulties when it comes to medicines use. However, evidence indicates that there are major gaps in pharmaceutical care service provision worldwide and limited research on interventions to optimise medication use for this patient population. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) provides a method for theoretically understanding individuals' behaviour and informing development of interventions. The aim of this research was to (a) identify the barriers and facilitators to the provision of medication dispensing and counselling services by pharmacists to patients with vision impairment, and (b) identify key TDF domains to be targeted in a future intervention.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with pharmacists from different pharmacy practice settings/areas in Saudi Arabia. The 14-domain TDF was utilised as the theoretical lens through which pharmacists' behaviours were examined. Interviews were conducted in Arabic or English, either face-to-face or over the telephone based on the participant's preference. Following transcription, interviews conducted in Arabic were translated into English before analysis. Data analysis involved using the framework method and content analysis to identify important barriers and facilitators to the provision of dispensing and counselling services to those with vision impairment. Key TDF domains that could be targeted in a future intervention were then identified using a consensus-based approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-six pharmacists were interviewed. Pharmacists' experience in pharmacy practice ranged from two to 28 years. A range of barriers and facilitators were highlighted as important in providing services to those with vision impairment. Eight domains were identified as 'key domains' including: 'Knowledge', 'Skills', 'Beliefs about capabilities', 'Goals', 'Memory, attention, and decision processes', 'Environmental context and resources', 'Social influences', and 'Behavioural regulation'.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers and facilitators identified by pharmacists will inform the development of an intervention to ensure its applicability to everyday practice. Future research will focus on the process of developing the proposed intervention through targeting key TDF domains to improve medication dispensing and counselling by pharmacists to patients with vision impairment.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing for people with dementia in ambulatory care: a cross-sectional observational study

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is highly prevalent among people with dementia (PwD) and linked to negative outcomes, such as hospitalisation and mortality. However, there are limited data on prescribing appropriateness for PwD in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the prevalence of PIP and investigate associations between PIP and other patient characteristics among PwD in an ambulatory care setting.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, retrospective analysis was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia. Patients who were ≥ 65 years old, had dementia, and visited ambulatory care clinics between 01/01/2019 and 31/12/2021 were included. Prescribing appropriateness was evaluated by applying the Screening Tool of Older Persons Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria. Descriptive analyses were used to describe the study population. Prevalence of PIP and the prevalence per each STOPP criterion were calculated as a percentage of all eligible patients. Logistic regression analysis was used to investigate associations between PIP, polypharmacy, age and sex; odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Analyses were conducted using SPSS v27.

RESULTS

A total of 287 PwD were identified; 56.0% (n = 161) were female. The mean number of medications prescribed was 9.0 [standard deviation (SD) ± 4.2]. The prevalence of PIP was 61.0% (n = 175). Common instances of PIP were drugs prescribed beyond the recommended duration (n = 90, 31.4%), drugs prescribed without an evidence-based clinical indication (n = 78, 27.2%), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for > 8 weeks (n = 75, 26.0%), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors with concurrent drugs that reduce heart rate (n = 60, 21.0%). Polypharmacy was observed in 82.6% (n = 237) of patients and was strongly associated with PIP (adjusted OR 24.1, 95% CI 9.0-64.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings have revealed a high prevalence of PIP among PwD in Saudi Arabia that is strongly associated with polypharmacy. Future research should aim to explore key stakeholders' experiences and perspectives of medicines management to optimise medication use for this vulnerable patient population.

Exposure to weak opioids and risk of gastrointestinal tract cancers: A series of nested case-control studies

AIMS

There is evidence gastrointestinal (GI) motility may play a role in the development of GI cancers. Weak opioids (codeine and dihydrocodeine) decrease GI motility, but their effect on GI cancer risk has not been assessed. We aim to assess the association between weak opioids and cancers of the GI tract.

METHODS

A series of nested case-control studies was conducted using Scottish general practice records from the Primary Care Clinical Informatics Unit Research database. Oesophageal (n = 2432), gastric (n = 1443) and colorectal cancer (n = 8750) cases, diagnosed between 1999 and 2011, were identified and matched with up to five controls. Weak opioid use was identified from prescribing records. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using conditional logistic regression, adjusting for relevant comorbidities and medication use.

RESULTS

There was no association between weak opioids and colorectal cancer (adjusted OR = 0.96, CI 0.90, 1.02, P = 0.15). There was an increased risk of oesophageal (adjusted OR = 1.16, CI 1.04, 1.29, P = 0.01) and gastric cancer (adjusted OR = 1.26, CI 1.10, 1.45, P = 0.001). The associations for oesophageal cancer, but not gastric cancer, were attenuated when weak opioid users were compared with users of another analgesic (adjusted OR = 1.03 CI 0.86, 1.22, P = 0.76 and adjusted OR = 1.29 CI 1.02, 1.64, P = 0.04 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large population-based study, there was no consistent evidence of an association between weak opioids and oesophageal or colorectal cancer risk, but a small increased risk of gastric cancer. Further investigation is required to determine whether this association is causal or reflects residual confounding or confounding by indication.

GPs' and pharmacists' views of integrating pharmacists into general practices: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Practice-based pharmacists (PBPs) have been introduced into general practice across the UK to relieve some of the pressures within primary care. However, there is little existing UK literature that has explored healthcare professionals' (HCPs') views about PBP integration and how this role has evolved.

AIM

To explore the views and experiences of GPs, PBPs, and community pharmacists (CPs) about PBPs' integration into general practice and their impact on primary healthcare delivery.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative interview study in primary care in Northern Ireland.

METHOD

Purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit triads (a GP, a PBP, and a CP) from across five administrative healthcare areas in Northern Ireland. Sampling of practices to recruit GPs and PBPs commenced in August 2020. These HCPs identified the CPs who had most contact with the general practices in which the recruited GPs and PBPs were working. Semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven triads were recruited from across the five administrative areas. Four main themes in relation to PBPs' integration into general practices were revealed: evolution of the role; PBP attributes; collaboration and communication; and impact on care. Areas for development were identified such as patient awareness of the PBP role. Many saw PBPs as a 'central hub-middleman' between general practice and community pharmacies.

CONCLUSION

Participants reported that PBPs had integrated well and perceived a positive impact on primary healthcare delivery. Further work is needed to increase patient awareness of the PBP role.

Patient-reported perspectives of therapeutic radiographers when undergoing radiotherapy: A European multi-centre study

INTRODUCTION

Radiotherapy is delivered almost exclusively by therapeutic radiographers/radiation therapist (RTTs). Patient's perspectives of RTTs affect levels of trust and confidence in the profession and can have a significant impact on overall radiotherapy experience. The study reports patients' perspectives of RTTs from their experience of undergoing radiotherapy. Four partner sites collaborated in this research and included Malta, Poland, Portugal, and the UK (lead site).

METHODS

A survey was developed to gather information from patients receiving radiotherapy or who had had radiotherapy within the previous 24 months. Participants ranked their responses to 23 statements relating to person-centred care on a 5-point scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Mann-Whitney or Kruskal Wallis tests were applied to test differences in responses to 5 key statements for patient characteristics including gender, age group, diagnosis, country, time spent with RTTs and number of fractions remaining at survey completion.

RESULTS

Three hundred and forty-seven surveys are included. Patients report a positive perception of RTTs (95.4% agree with 'I feel cared for'). Statistically significant differences in responses were found between gender, diagnosis, country, time spent with RTTs and fractions of radiotherapy remaining. Patients who had more time with RTTs and completed their surveys during radiotherapy had a more positive perception of RTTs.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that sufficient time with RTTs is key to ensuring a positive radiotherapy patient experience. RTTs being attentive, understanding, and informative are most predictive of a positive overall patient experience. Timing of survey completion can influence responses.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

RTT education programmes should incorporate training on person-centred care at all levels. Further research into patient experience of RTTs is warranted.

Trends and correlates of concurrent opioid and benzodiazepine and/or gabapentinoid use among Ontario nursing home residents

BACKGROUND

A concern with long-term opioid use is the increased risk arising when opioids are used concurrently with drugs that can potentiate their associated adverse effects. The drugs most often encountered are benzodiazepines (BZDs) and gabapentinoids. Our study objectives were to examine trends in the concurrent use of opioids and BZDs, or gabapentinoids, in a Canadian nursing home population over an 11-year period, and current resident-level correlates of this concurrent use.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based, repeated cross-sectional study among Ontario nursing home residents (>65 years) dispensed opioids between April 2009 and February 2020. For the last study year, we examined cross-sectional associations between resident characteristics and concurrent use of opioids with BZDs or gabapentinoids. Linked data on nursing home residents from clinical and health administrative databases was used. The yearly proportions of residents who were dispensed an opioid concurrently with a BZD or gabapentinoid were plotted with percent change derived from log-binomial regression models. Separate modified Poisson regression models estimated resident-level correlates of concurrent use of opioids with BZDs or gabapentinoids.

RESULTS

Over the study period, among residents dispensed an opioid there was a 53.2% relative decrease (30.7% to 14.4%) in concurrent BZD and a 505.4% relative increase (4.4% to 26.6%) in concurrent gabapentinoid use. In adjusted models, increasing age and worsening cognition were inversely associated with the concurrent use of both classes, but most other significantly related covariates were unique to each drug class (e.g., sex and anxiety disorders for BZD, pain severity and presence of pain-related conditions for gabapentinoids).

CONCLUSIONS

Co-administration of BZDs or gabapentinoids in Ontario nursing home residents dispensed opioids remains common, but the pattern of co-use has changed over time. Observed covariates of concurrent use in 2019/20 suggest distinct but overlapping resident populations requiring consideration of the relative risks versus benefits of this co-use and monitoring for potential harm.

Enhancing deprescribing: A qualitative understanding of the complexities of pharmacist-led deprescribing in care homes

The English National Overprescribing Review identified that older people often take eight or more medicines a day. The report recommended pharmacists in primary care should take responsibility for addressing polypharmacy. Overprescribing is a safety concern in care homes as approximately half of older care home residents are prescribed at least one medicine that is unnecessary or now harmful. This predisposes them to adverse outcomes including hospitalisation and mortality. Deprescribing is the planned activity of stopping or reducing a medicine that may no longer be appropriate. Deprescribing, when performed by a pharmacist, is a multidisciplinary activity requiring close communication with general practitioners (GPs) and care home staff. A recently completed trial that integrated pharmacists with prescribing rights into older peoples' care homes found significant variation in proactive deprescribing activity. The aim of the current study was to specifically explore beliefs and practices of deprescribing in care homes. A qualitative approach was adopted to examine individual, social and contextual factors that acted as enablers and barriers to pharmacist deprescribing in care homes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants of the previous study (16 pharmacists, 6 GPs and 7 care home staff from Northern Ireland, Scotland and England). Using thematic analysis, we identified two themes: (a) Structures and systems affecting deprescribing, that is the context in which deprescribing happened, including team involvement and routine practices in GP surgeries and care homes; (b) Balancing risks when deprescribing, that is the perception of individual risk and social barriers were mitigated by understanding the medical background of residents. This supported the clinical understanding that risks from overprescribing were greater than risks from deprescribing. While deprescribing can involve all health professionals in the primary care team, these results suggest the pharmacist is well placed to lead the process; by having both clinical competence and professional willingness to drive this activity forward.

'It stayed there, front and centre': perspectives on community pharmacy's contribution to front-line healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic in Northern Ireland

OBJECTIVES

To explore community pharmacists and key stakeholders' perspectives and reflections on the community pharmacy workforce's preparedness for, and response to, COVID-19, including lessons for future public health crises.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative study using semistructured interviews (via telephone or online videoconferencing platform), with community pharmacists and a range of key stakeholders (representing other health professions, professional/governing organisations concerned with community pharmacy and patient advocacy groups) from across Northern Ireland. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and constant comparison.

RESULTS

Thirty interviews were conducted with community pharmacists (n=15) and key stakeholders (n=15). Four themes were identified: (1) adaptation and adjustment (reflecting how community responded quickly to the need to maintain services and adjusted and adapted services accordingly); (2) the primary point of contact (the continuing accessibility of community pharmacy when other services were not available and role as a communication hub, particularly in relation to information for patients and maintaining contact with other healthcare professionals); (3) lessons learnt (the flexibility of community pharmacy, the lack of infrastructure, especially in relation to information technology, and the need to build on the pandemic experience to develop practice); and (4) planning for the future (better infrastructure which reinforced concerns about poor technology, coordination of primary care services and preparing for the next public health crisis). There was a general view that community pharmacy needed to build on what had been learnt to advance the role of the profession.

CONCLUSIONS

The strengths of community pharmacy and its contribution to healthcare services in the COVID-19 pandemic were noted by community pharmacists and acknowledged by key stakeholders. The findings from this study should inform the policy debate on community pharmacy and its contribution to the public health agenda.

An external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care (PolyPrime)

Background

For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy (use of multiple medications) is a standard practice. PolyPrime is a theory-based intervention developed to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. This pilot study aims to assess the feasibility of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care in Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI).

Methods

This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aimed to recruit 12 general practitioner (GP) practices (six in NI; six in the ROI counties that border NI) and ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) per GP practice (n = 120). Practices allocated to the intervention arm watched an online video and scheduled medication reviews with patients on two occasions. We assessed the feasibility of collecting GP record (medication appropriateness, health service use) and patient self-reported data [health-related quality of life (HRQoL), health service use)] at baseline, 6 and 9 months. HRQoL was measured using the EuroQol-5 dimension-5 level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and medication-related burden quality-of-life (MRB-QoL) tool. An embedded process evaluation and health economics analysis were also undertaken. Pre-specified progression criteria were used to determine whether to proceed to a definitive cRCT.

Results

Twelve GP practices were recruited and randomised. Three GP practices withdrew from the study due to COVID-related factors. Sixty-eight patients were recruited, with 47 (69.1%) being retained until the end of the study. GP record data were available for 47 patients for medication appropriateness analysis at 9 months. EQ-5D-5L and MRB-QoL data were available for 46 and 41 patients, respectively, at 9 months. GP record and patient self-reported health service use data were available for 47 patients at 9 months. Health service use was comparable in terms of overall cost estimated from GP record versus patient self-reported data. The intervention was successfully delivered as intended; it was acceptable to GPs, practice staff, and patients; and potential mechanisms of action have been identified. All five progression criteria were met (two ‘Go’, three ‘Amend’).

Conclusion

Despite challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study has demonstrated that it may be feasible to conduct an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care across two healthcare jurisdictions.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897. Registered 19 November 2019. Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04181879. Registered 02 December 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-022-01161-6.

Antimicrobial resistance in urinary pathogens and culture-independent detection of trimethoprim resistance in urine from patients with urinary tract infection

Background

Although urinary tract infections (UTIs) are extremely common, isolation of causative uropathogens is not always routinely performed, with antibiotics frequently prescribed empirically. This study determined the susceptibility of urinary isolates from two Health and Social Care Trusts (HSCTs) in Northern Ireland to a range of antibiotics commonly used in the treatment of UTIs. Furthermore, we determined if detection of trimethoprim resistance genes (dfrA) could be used as a potential biomarker for rapid detection of phenotypic trimethoprim resistance in urinary pathogens and from urine without culture.

Methods

Susceptibility of E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates (n = 124) to trimethoprim, amoxicillin, ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin, co-amoxiclav and nitrofurantoin in addition to susceptibility of Proteus mirabilis (n = 61) and Staphylococcus saprophyticus (n = 17) to trimethoprim was determined by ETEST® and interpreted according to EUCAST breakpoints. PCR was used to detect dfrA genes in bacterial isolates (n = 202) and urine samples(n = 94).

Results

Resistance to trimethoprim was observed in 37/124 (29.8%) E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates with an MIC₉₀ > 32 mg/L. DfrA genes were detected in 29/37 (78.4%) trimethoprim-resistant isolates. Detection of dfrA was highly sensitive (93.6%) and specific (91.4%) in predicting phenotypic trimethoprim resistance among E. coli and Klebsiella spp. isolates. The dfrA genes analysed were detected using a culture-independent PCR method in 16/94 (17%) urine samples. Phenotypic trimethoprim resistance was apparent in isolates cultured from 15/16 (94%) dfrA-positive urine samples. There was a significant association (P < 0.0001) between the presence of dfrA and trimethoprim resistance in urine samples containing Gram-negative bacteria (Sensitivity = 75%; Specificity = 96.9%; PPV = 93.8%; NPV = 86.1%).

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that molecular detection of dfrA genes is a good indicator of trimethoprim resistance without the need for culture and susceptibility testing.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12866-022-02551-9.

A systematic review of interventions to reduce anticholinergic burden in older people with dementia in primary care

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to assess the types and effectiveness of interventions that sought to reduce anticholinergic burden (ACB) in people with dementia (PwD) in primary care.

METHODS

One trial registry and eight electronic databases were systematically searched to identify eligible English language studies from inception until December 2021. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to be randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or non-randomised studies (NRS), including controlled before-and-after studies and interrupted time-series studies, of interventions to reduce ACB in PwD aged ≥65 years (either community-dwelling or care home residents). All outcomes were to be considered. Quality was to be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for NRS. If data could not be pooled for meta-analysis, a narrative synthesis was to be conducted.

RESULTS

In total, 1880 records were found, with 1594 records remaining after removal of duplicates. Following title/abstract screening, 13 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. None of these studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Reasons for exclusion were incorrect study design, ineligible study population, lack of focus on reducing ACB, and studies conducted outside the primary care setting.

CONCLUSIONS

This 'empty' systematic review highlights the lack of interventions to reduce ACB in PwD within primary care, despite this being highlighted as a priority area for research in recent clinical guidance. Future research should focus on development and testing of interventions to reduce ACB in this patient population through high-quality clinical trials.

A survey of the community pharmacy workforce’s preparedness for, and response to, the COVID-19 pandemic in Northern Ireland

Introduction

Community pharmacy is one of the most accessible sectors in the health service and played a key role in responding to COVID-19 (1). Efforts to tackle COVID-19 have required an immediate response from the community pharmacy workforce.

Aim

To examine views and experiences of community pharmacists regarding changes in practice/processes in preparation for and response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A telephone questionnaire was conducted across a geographically stratified sample of community pharmacists in Northern Ireland (NI). Based on the total number of pharmacies (N=528) and an anticipated response rate of 30%, up to 433 pharmacies were to be contacted to achieve a target sample size of n=130 (sampling fraction 24%). The questionnaire sections comprised: (1) measures taken to prevent COVID-19 infection; (2) response to the pandemic, i.e. immediate actions taken, effect on service provision and new/innovative ways of working; (3) pandemic preparedness; (4) communication with GPs and patients; (5) professional knowledge; (6) recovery and future outlook. Data were coded, entered into SPSS v27, and analysed descriptively. Free-text comments were summarised using thematic analysis.

Results

One hundred and thirty community pharmacists (175 approached) completed the questionnaire (74% response rate). Pharmacists responded comprehensively to implementing infection control measures, e.g. management of social distancing in the shop (n=125, 96.2%), making adjustments to premises, e.g. barriers/screens (n=124, 95.4%), while maintaining medicines supply (n=130, 100.0%) and advice to patients (n=121, 93.1%). Patient-facing services such as minor ailments and smoking cessation were initially stopped by 115 (88.5%) and 93 (71.5%) pharmacies respectively during the first wave of the pandemic (March-May 2020); by the second wave (Sep-Dec 2020), modified services had resumed in 121 (93.1%) and 104 (79.9%) pharmacies respectively. Newly commissioned services were provided, e.g. emergency supply service (n=121, 93.1%), flu vaccination for healthcare workers (n=101, 77.7%) and volunteer deliveries to vulnerable people (n=71, 54.6%); new initiatives were developed, e.g. measures to flag/assist patients with sensitive issues (n=73, 56.2%). Pharmacies with a business continuity plan increased from 85 (65.4%) pre-pandemic to 101 (77.7%) during the second wave. Free-text responses indicated how pharmacists adapted practice in the front line to reassure and advise the public and maintain essential medicines supply. Pharmacists were least prepared for the increased workload and patients’ challenging behaviour, but 126 (96.9%) reported that they felt better prepared during the second wave. Telephone was the main method of communication with patients (n=107, 82.3%) and GPs (n=114, 87.7%). Pharmacists felt they had sufficient training resources available (n=113, 86.9%) to maintain professional knowledge. Pharmacists agreed/strongly agreed that they would be able to re-establish normal services (n=114, 87.7%), were willing to administer COVID-19 vaccines (n=105, 80.7%) and provide COVID-19 testing (n=79, 60.8%) in the future.

Conclusion

The high response rate is a strength of the study, but the impact is limited by not including patients or service commissioners. The pharmacy workforce remained accessible and maintained supply of essential medicines and advice to patients throughout the pandemic. Provision of modified and additional services such as vaccination reinforced the clinical and public health role of pharmacy.

Reference

(1) Cadogan CA, Hughes CM. On the frontline against COVID-19: Community pharmacists’ contribution during a public health crisis. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2020; 17: 2032–2035.

Changes to community pharmacy practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-country documentary analysis

Introduction

Community pharmacy has played a frontline role during the COVID-19 pandemic (1,2). Governments and professional organisations in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland (RoI) have acknowledged the need to support and maximise community pharmacy to maintain delivery of patient care. However, the pandemic’s impact on day-to-day changes to community pharmacy practice has not been comprehensively examined across the island of Ireland.

Aim

To identify changes as communicated by policy and professional bodies to community pharmacy practice across the island of Ireland in preparation for and/or response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to compare identified changes in Northern Ireland (NI) and RoI.

Methods

Government, health service, regulatory and professional organisation websites in both NI and RoI were searched using relevant search terms (e.g. pharmacist, COVID-19). Any document (e.g. official publications/reports, website pages, circulars) containing information relating to changes to community pharmacy-related infrastructure, funding/resourcing, legislation, guidelines or policies in preparation for, and/or response to, COVID-19, published between 1^st January and 31^st October 2020 was included. Guidelines on clinical use of medicines were excluded as this was considered a separate topic. Initial screening of each website was undertaken by one reviewer. Brief details of potentially relevant documents were collated in a spreadsheet. Following removal of duplicates, full-texts of identified documents were assessed for inclusion by two reviewers independently, with discrepancies resolved through discussion. A content analysis was undertaken.

Results

In total, 253 documents were identified. Following removal of duplicates and screening, 98 documents were included in the analysis. Most documents were published in the first three months of the pandemic (March-May 2020). A key theme related to medication prescribing and supply, with changes implemented to ensure continued access to medicines. In both NI and RoI, significant changes were made to emergency supply arrangements (e.g. increase in allowable duration of supply at the request of patients). In RoI, legislative changes were made to recognise Healthmail as the national electronic prescription transfer system and to temporarily extend prescription validity. In NI, many community pharmacy services (e.g. Minor Ailments Service, Medicines Use Review) were ‘stood down’ during initial months of the pandemic. Much of the communication in NI and RoI related to operational changes to ensure business continuity. In both jurisdictions a temporary register of pharmacists was introduced to allow previously registered pharmacists to contribute to the health service response. Additionally, in NI, General Dental Practitioners were redeployed to assist with community pharmacy response. Other areas of focus across both jurisdictions included infection control within a workplace setting, dealing with situations where staff were affected by COVID-19, and the use of personal protective equipment during pharmacy service provision.

Conclusion

This study examined changes in community pharmacy practice across two jurisdictions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Whilst our searches were limited to publicly accessible documents only, the overlap in identified changes reflects the similarities in challenges faced by community pharmacists in adapting and responding to COVID-19. The cross-country comparison may help pharmacists and policy-makers to identify optimal approaches for responding to any future public health crises.

Reference

(1) Cadogan CA, Hughes CM. On the frontline against COVID-19: community pharmacists’ contribution during a public health crisis. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2021; 17(1): 2032-2035.

(2) Maidment I, Young E, MacPhee M, Booth A, Zaman H, Breen J, Hilton A, Kelly T, Wong G. Rapid realist review of the role of community pharmacy in the public health response to COVID-19. BMJ Open. 2021; 11(6): e0500043

An exploration of general practitioners’ and pharmacists’ views and experiences of integrating a pharmacist into general practice: a qualitative study

Introduction

Practice-based pharmacists (PBPs) have been introduced into general practice across the United Kingdom (UK) to relieve some of the pressures within primary care (1,2). However, there is little existing UK literature that has explored healthcare professionals’ (HCPs’) views about PBP integration and how this role has evolved.

Aim

To explore the views and experiences of general practitioners (GPs), PBPs, and community pharmacists (CPs) about PBPs’ integration into general practice and their impact on primary healthcare delivery.

Methods

Purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit triads (a GP, a PBP, and a CP) from across five administrative healthcare areas in one region in the UK to participate in one-to-one semi-structured interviews. Sampling of practices to recruit GPs and PBPs commenced in August 2020. These HCPs identified the CPs who had most contact with the general practices in which the recruited GPs and PBPs were working. The interview topic guides were developed based on the published literature, and through discussion within the research team; they were piloted with two GPs, two PBPs, and two pharmacists. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, interviews were conducted via telephone or Microsoft Teams platform. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

Results

Eleven triads were recruited from across the five administrative areas. Analysis of interview transcripts is ongoing. Findings to date have revealed four main themes in relation to PBPs’ integration into general practices (Table): evolution of the role, PBP attributes, collaboration and communication, and impact on care. A number of areas for development were identified such as patient awareness of the role and communication pathways between PBPs and CPs. Many saw PBPs as a ‘central hub-middleman’ between general practice and community pharmacies and between primary and secondary care.

Conclusion

Participants reported that PBPs had integrated well, and perceived a positive impact on primary health care delivery. Although recruitment was limited to one UK geographical region, the triad approach provided a more comprehensive overview of the working relationships between the three HCP groups. Further work is needed to increase patient awareness of the PBP role.

References

(1) Strategic Leadership Group for Pharmacy. Practice-based pharmacists’ statement. 2016. (Online) Available at: https://www.health-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/health/practice-based-pharmacists.pdf (accessed 06 Oct 2021).

(2) NHS England. Clinical pharmacists in general practice. 2015. (Online) Available at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/gp/gpfv/workforce/building-the-general-practice-workforce/cp-gp/ (accessed 06 Oct 2021).

Development of a core set of clinical skills for pharmacist prescribers working in general practice: a Delphi study

Introduction

With increasing numbers of pharmacists working in general practices [also called general practice-based pharmacists (PBPs)] and undertaking patient-facing roles, it has been recognised that they must have the necessary clinical skills (clinical examination and procedural skills) (1). However, previous studies have highlighted that PBPs do not feel confident regarding their clinical skills, and it is unclear what skills are needed (1).

Aim

To develop a core set of clinical skills required for pharmacists who intend to practise as independent prescribers working in general practice.

Methods

Based on a previous study (2), 18 clinical skills were selected for inclusion in a three-round Delphi consensus questionnaire. Designated leads (n=54) of pharmacist independent prescribing programmes in each United Kingdom (UK) educational provider (n=47) listed on the General Pharmaceutical Council website were invited to participate in March 2021. Following consent, a web-based questionnaire was distributed by email in April 2021 (Round 1). Two subsequent rounds were distributed in May and June 2021 respectively, and comprised the clinical skills for which consensus had not been achieved previously. A 9-point Likert scale was used (ranging from 1=limited importance to 9=critical). The response rate and distribution of scores for each clinical skill were calculated after each round. A clinical skill was included in the core set if 80% or more of participants scored between 7- 9, and 15% or less scored between 1-3.

Results

From 24 recruited participants (44.4%), 21 participants (87.5%) from 20 providers responded to Round 1 of the questionnaire, and also responded to the second and third rounds (100%). Following Round 1, seven clinical skills met the criteria for inclusion. Two additional clinical skills suggested by participants were added to the list of 11 clinical skills for which no consensus had been reached in the first round, hence, a total of 13 clinical skills were presented in Round 2. Two further skills were added to the core set following the second and third rounds respectively (four in total). The final core set consisted of 11 clinical skills: ‘Measuring heart rate (radial pulse)’, ‘Assessing respiratory rate’, ‘Measuring blood pressure (manual, e.g. with aneroid sphygmomanometer)’, ‘Measuring blood pressure (automated, i.e. electronic blood pressure monitor)’, ‘Measuring peripheral oxygen saturation (using pulse oximeter)’, ‘Measuring temperature’, ‘Undertaking a urinalysis’, ‘Respiratory examination (includes inspection, palpation, percussion and listening to breath sounds)’, ‘Measuring Peak Expiratory Flow Rate’, ‘Screening for/assessment of depression and anxiety using a validated questionnaire (e.g. Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] scoring)’, and ‘Patient assessment via National Early Warning Score (NEWS)’. No consensus was reached on nine clinical skills.

Conclusion

This study has produced a core set of clinical skills for prescribing PBPs. The study was entirely UK-based, thus findings may not be generalisable to other countries. Moreover, a lower threshold for consensus would have led to the inclusion of more skills. However, this core set can serve as a reference for other countries developing policies on pharmacist roles. Furthermore, this study may contribute to standardisation of training and assessment for pharmacist prescribers working in general practice.

References

(1) Girvin B, Wilson D. Clinical skills training for pharmacists in general practice. Prescriber. 2018 Dec 11; 29(12): 19-25.

(2) Girvin B, Akpan U, Hampson N, Middleton H, Sims L, Barry H. Establishing the roles undertaken and clinical skills needed by general practice-based pharmacists: a web-based survey. Pharm Educ. 2020 Sep 4; 20(1): 253.

General practitioners' experiences with, views of, and attitudes towards, general practice-based pharmacists: a cross-sectional survey

Background

There is limited United Kingdom (UK) literature on general practice-based pharmacists’ (PBPs’) role evolution and few studies have explored general practitioners’ (GPs’) experiences on pharmacist integration into general practice. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate GPs’ experiences with, views of, and attitudes towards PBPs in Northern Ireland (NI).

Methods

A paper-based self-administered questionnaire comprising four sections was mailed in 2019 to 329 general practices across NI and was completed by one GP in every practice who had most contact with the PBP. Descriptive analyses were used and responses to open-ended questions were analysed thematically.

Results

The response rate was 61.7% (203/329). There was at least one PBP per general practice. All GPs had face-to-face meetings with PBPs, with three-quarters (78.7%, n = 159) meeting with the PBP more than once a week. Approximately two-thirds of GPs (62.4%, n = 126) reported that PBPs were qualified as independent prescribers, and 76.2% of these (n = 96/126) indicated that prescribers were currently prescribing for patients. The majority of GPs reported that PBPs always/very often had the required clinical skills (83.6%, n = 162) and knowledge (87.0%, n = 167) to provide safe and effective care for patients. However, 31.1% (n = 61) stated that PBPs only sometimes had the confidence to make clinical decisions. The majority of GPs (> 85%) displayed largely positive attitudes towards collaboration with PBPs. Most GPs agreed/strongly agreed that PBPs will have a positive impact on patient outcomes (95.0%, n = 192) and can provide a better link between general practices and community pharmacists (96.1%, n = 194). However, 24.8% of GPs (n = 50) were unclear if the PBP role moved community pharmacists to the periphery of the primary care team. An evaluation of the free-text comments indicated that GPs were in favour of more PBP sessions and full-time posts.

Conclusion

Most GPs had positive views of, and attitudes towards, PBPs. The findings may have implications for future developments in order to extend integration of PBPs within general practice, including the enhancement of training in clinical skills and decision-making. Exploring PBPs’, community pharmacists’ and patients’ views of this role in general practice is required to corroborate study findings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01607-5.

Learning From Consultations Conducted by Community Pharmacists in Northern Ireland for Nonprescription Sildenafil: A Qualitative Study Using the Theoretical Domains Framework

INTRODUCTION

Nonprescription sildenafil was introduced to the United Kingdom in 2018 as the first pharmacy service concerning sexual function, an important but often ignored factor for quality of life.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate pharmacists' views on providing nonprescription sildenafil, their perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to provide this service and strategies to overcome potential barriers, using a theory-based approach.

METHODS

Community pharmacists were purposefully sampled in Northern Ireland, followed by snowball sampling. Face-to-face interviews were conducted between October 2019 and January 2020. The semi-structured interviews used a piloted topic guide based on the 14-domain Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymized. Transcripts were analyzed deductively in NVivo 13, utilizing the TDF domains as coding categories. Within each domain, content analysis was utilized to identify barriers and facilitators.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Barriers and facilitators within the TDF domains for pharmacists to provide nonprescription sildenafil.

RESULTS

Ten pharmacists were interviewed to reach data saturation. Eight pharmacists had experience with dispensing nonprescription sildenafil. They valued nonprescription sildenafil as an additional service ("Social/professional role and identity"). Training, concise product guidelines, and private consultation areas were important facilitators ("Environmental context and resources"). The service required trusting clients ("Optimism"), with concerns about abuse and men not visiting their GP. From experience gained, pharmacists became more confident dealing with difficult situations such as patients being vague about their medical history or alcoholism or mental problems as causes for erectile disfunction (ED) ("Skills" and "Beliefs about capabilities"). Pharmacists considered lifestyle and medication causes of ED important but preferred to focus on safe supply. In general, pharmacists were satisfied with the perceived professional recognition, using their clinical knowledge or helping patients resume sexual relationships ("Beliefs about consequences").

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists welcomed nonprescription sildenafil to enhance their role as easily accessible healthcare providers for patients. Gordijn R, Teichert M, Nicolai MPJ, et al. Learning From Consultations Conducted by Community Pharmacists in Northern Ireland for Nonprescription Sildenafil: A Qualitative Study Using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Sex Med 2021;9:100440.

Process evaluation for the Care Homes Independent Pharmacist Prescriber Study (CHIPPS)

Background

Medicines management in care homes requires significant improvement. CHIPPS was a cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of integrating pharmacist independent prescribers into care homes to assume central responsibility for medicines management. This paper reports the parallel mixed-methods process evaluation.

Method

Intervention arm consisted of 25 triads: Care homes (staff and up to 24 residents), General Practitioner (GP) and Pharmacist Independent Prescriber (PIP). Data sources were pharmaceutical care plans (PCPs), pharmacist activity logs, online questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results were mapped to the process evaluation objectives following the Medical Research Council framework.

Results

PCPs and activity logs were available from 22 PIPs. Questionnaires were returned by 16 PIPs, eight GPs, and two care home managers. Interviews were completed with 14 PIPs, eight GPs, nine care home managers, six care home staff, and one resident. All stakeholders reported some benefits from PIPs having responsibility for medicine management and identified no safety concerns. PIPs reported an increase in their knowledge and identified the value of having time to engage with care home staff and residents during reviews. The research paperwork was identified as least useful by many PIPs. PIPs conducted medication reviews on residents, recording 566 clinical interventions, many involving deprescribing; 93.8% of changes were sustained at 6 months. For 284 (50.2%) residents a medicine was stopped, and for a quarter of residents, changes involved a medicine linked to increased falls risk. Qualitative data indicated participants noted increased medication safety and improved resident quality of life. Contextual barriers to implementation were apparent in the few triads where PIP was not known previously to the GP and care home before the trial. In three triads, PIPs did not deliver the intervention.

Conclusions

The intervention was generally implemented as intended, and well-received by most stakeholders. Whilst there was widespread deprescribing, contextual factors effected opportunity for PIP engagement in care homes. Implementation was most effective when communication pathways between PIP and GP had been previously well-established.

Trial registration

The definitive RCT was registered with the ISRCTN registry (registration number ISRCTN 17847169).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07062-3.

Prospective Study of Policies and Use of Therapies for COVID-19 Amongst Australian Health Services during 2020

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated significant debate about how emerging infections can be treated in the absence of evidence-based therapies to combat disease. In particular, the use of off-label therapies outside of a clinical trial setting has been controversial.

AIM

We aimed to longitudinally study policies and prescribing practices pertaining to therapies for COVID-19 in Australian Health Services in 2020.

METHODS

Prospective data was collected from participating Australian health services who may care for patients with COVID-19 via an electronic portal. A single informant from each health service was emailed a survey link at regular intervals. Information was sought regarding changes to COVID-19 policy at their service and use of therapies for COVID-19.

RESULTS

Overall, 78 hospitals were represented from 39 respondents with longitudinal data collection from May to December 2020. All Australian states/territories were represented with the majority of respondents located in a major city (34/39; 87%). Just over half (20/39) of respondents had a written policy for COVID-19 therapy use at their health service at survey enrolment and policies changed frequently throughout the pandemic. Therapy use outside of a clinical trial was reported in 54% of health services, most frequently in Victoria, correlating with higher numbers of COVID-19 cases. At study commencement hydroxychloroquine was most frequently used, with corticosteroids and remdesivir use increasingly throughout the study period.

CONCLUSION

Our results reflect the reactive nature of prescribing of therapies for COVID-19 and highlight the importance of evidence-based guidelines to assist prescribers. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Exposure to Ranitidine and Risk of Bladder Cancer: A Nested Case-Control Study

INTRODUCTION

Ranitidine has been shown to contain the carcinogen N-nitrosodimethylamine and increase urinary N-nitrosodimethylamine in humans. We investigated whether ranitidine use is associated with increased bladder cancer risk.

METHODS

A nested case-control study was conducted within the Primary Care Clinical Informatics Unit Research database which contains general practice records from Scotland. Bladder cancer cases, diagnosed between 1999 and 2011, were identified and matched with up to 5 controls (based on age, sex, general practice, and date of registration). Ranitidine, other histamine-2 receptor agonists, and proton pump inhibitors were identified from prescribing records. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using conditional logistic regression after adjusting for comorbidities and smoking.

RESULTS

There were 3,260 cases and 14,037 controls. There was evidence of an increased risk of bladder cancer in ranitidine users, compared with nonusers (fully adjusted OR = 1.22; 95% CI 1.06-1.40), which was more marked with use for over 3 years of ranitidine (fully adjusted OR = 1.43; 95% CI 1.05-1.94). By contrast, there was little evidence of any association between proton pump inhibitor use and bladder cancer risk based on any use (fully adjusted OR = 0.98; 95% CI 0.88-1.11) or over 3 years of use (fully adjusted OR = 0.98; 95% CI 0.80-1.20).

DISCUSSION

In this large population-based study, the use of ranitidine particularly long-term use was associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer. Further studies are necessary to attempt to replicate this finding in other settings.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

An Update on Medication Use in Older Adults: a Narrative Review

Purpose of Review

The global phenomenon of population aging is impacting the health and care needs of society. The use of medications by older adults is acknowledged to be the most common form of medical intervention for many acute and chronic conditions and prescribing in this population continues to increase. In this narrative review, we summarise the age-related factors that should be considered when prescribing for older adults, address some of the perennial challenges related to medicine use in older people, and highlight important emerging research in this area.

Recent Findings

A range of age-related factors should be considered when prescribing for older adults. However, the evidence base still lacks data pertaining to older adults due to their continued under-representation in clinical trials. Multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and inappropriate prescribing continue to remain prevalent among older adults, although recent research has been focused on the development and evaluation of complex interventions to address these challenges.

Summary

Further high-quality studies of interventions to improve and support medication use in older adults are needed, ensuring that older adults are well represented in such trials and consideration is given to the measurement of patient- and provider-focused outcomes.

Protocol for a process evaluation of an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care: the PolyPrime study

Background

The PolyPrime intervention is a theory-based intervention aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people (aged ≥65 years) in primary care. The intervention consists of an online video which demonstrates how general practitioners (GPs) can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. The aim of the process evaluation is to further examine the implementation of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care. This will involve investigating whether the PolyPrime intervention can be delivered as intended across two healthcare systems, how acceptable the intervention is to GPs, practice staff and patients, and to identify the intervention’s likely mechanisms of action.

Methods

The PolyPrime study is an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) which aims to recruit 12 GP practices across Northern Ireland [NI] (n=6) and the six counties in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) that border NI (n=6). Practices have been randomised to intervention or usual care. An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention to GPs, practice staff and patients and potential mechanisms of action (i.e. what components of the intervention were perceived to be effective). Quantitative data will be collected from data collection forms completed by GPs and practice staff and a feedback questionnaire completed by patients from intervention arm practices, which will be analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with GPs and practice staff and audio-recordings of medication review appointments from the intervention arm practices which will be transcribed and analysed using the framework method. Quantitative and qualitative data will be triangulated to provide an overall assessment of intervention fidelity, intervention acceptability, and mechanisms of action.

Discussion

This process evaluation will add to feasibility data from the pilot cRCT by providing evidence on the fidelity of implementing the intervention package across two healthcare systems, the acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govISRCTN41009897. Registered on 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.govNCT04181879. Registered 02 December 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05410-6.

Development of criteria for identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults with cancer receiving palliative care (PIP-CPC)

OBJECTIVES

To develop criteria for identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing of medications for symptomatic relief in older adults (≥65 years) with cancer who are receiving palliative care and have an estimated life expectancy of <1 year.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A two-round Delphi exercise was conducted using web-based questionnaires. A panel of 18 expert stakeholders with expertise in palliative care, oncology and/or geriatric medicine across Ireland and the United Kingdom rated their level of agreement with each statement using a 5-point Likert scale and had the option of adding free-text comments throughout the questionnaire. A priori decision rules were used to accept or reject criteria.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight criteria were presented in Round 1. Group consensus was achieved for 15 criteria which were included in the final set of criteria. Following a review of the panel's ratings and additional comments for the remaining 13 criteria, four criteria were removed from Round 2. Group consensus was achieved for all nine criteria included in Round 2. The final set comprised 24 criteria relating to: anorexia-cachexia (n = 1); anxiety (n = 2); constipation (n = 5); delirium (n = 1); depression (n = 3); diarrhoea (n = 1); dyspnoea/breathlessness (n = 1); fatigue (n = 2); insomnia (n = 2); nausea and vomiting (n = 2); pain (n = 3); duplicate drug classes (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

A consensus-agreed set of prescribing criteria has been developed for identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing of medications for symptomatic relief in older adults with cancer who are receiving palliative care and have an estimated life expectancy of less than one year. Future studies should examine the application and validity of these criteria.

'I just take them because I know the people that give them to me': A theory-informed interview study of community-dwelling people with dementia and carers' perspectives of medicines management

OBJECTIVE

Identify facilitators and barriers to successful medicines management for people with dementia (PwD) in primary care from the perspectives of community-dwelling PwD and carers.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews conducted with PwD and carers in Northern Ireland. The 14-domain Theoretical Domains Framework guided data collection and analysis. Interviews explored participants' experiences and perceptions of medicines management. PwD also completed the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire indicating their level of agreement with statements about medicines. Qualitative data were analysed using the framework method and content analysis. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

Eighteen PwD and 15 carers were interviewed. PwD believed they were competent with medicines management ('beliefs about capabilities'). Most PwD reported having strategies to prompt them to take their medicines ('memory, attention and decision processes'). Carers played an important role in supporting PwD with medicines management ('social influences') and monitoring adherence ('behavioural regulation') and anticipated having to take on a greater role as patients' cognitive impairment worsened ('beliefs about consequences'). Participants highlighted assistance provided by community pharmacies with medicines acquisition and delivery ('environmental context and resources') and placed great trust in primary healthcare professionals ('social influences'). PwD had positive attitudes towards medication and believed strongly in the necessity of their medicines.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to use a theoretical approach to explore medicines management for community-dwelling PwD. The findings provide new insights into the critical role of carers in facilitating optimal medicines management and will inform future intervention development, in which carers' needs assessment and involvement will be key.

Development and feasibility testing of an evidence-based training programme for pharmacist independent prescribers responsible for the medicines-related activities within care homes

INTRODUCTION

The UK pharmacists with independent prescribing rights (pharmacist independent prescribers [PIPs]) are authorised to prescribe within their areas of competence. To enable PIPs to provide pharmaceutical care to residents in care homes and assume responsibility for medicines management, a process for development and assessment of competence is required. The aim of this research was to develop a training and accreditation process (training programme) to enable PIPs to operate safely and effectively within care homes.

METHODS

Located in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland across four sites and based on a systematic review, it consisted of four phases: (1) initial stakeholder engagement, (2) uni-professional focus groups and interviews, (3) expert panel consensus and (4) feasibility testing. Four PIPs were trained each to provide pharmaceutical care to 10 care home residents. An expert panel synthesised the evidence at each stage to develop each iteration of the training programme. Content analysis was used throughout.

RESULTS

Differences in baseline knowledge of PIPs required inclusion of a Personal Development Framework and the provision of a mentor. Face-to-face training focussed on managing medicines for a complex older person, minimising prescribing costs and supporting people without capacity. Provision of time to understand local context and develop relationships with care homes and general practitioners was identified as a central requirement. PIPs were assessed for competency via viva. Feasibility testing demonstrated that the derived training programme was acceptable, practical and effective.

DISCUSSION

The model seemed to work, but due to small numbers, larger-scale testing of the training programme is now required.

A systematic scoping review of interventions to optimise medication prescribing and adherence in older adults with cancer

BACKGROUND

Older adults with cancer often require multiple medications (polypharmacy) comprising cancer-specific treatments, supportive care medications (e.g. analgesics), and medications for pre-existing health conditions. Increasing numbers of medications may increase risks of potentially inappropriate prescribing and non-adherence.

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of evaluations of interventions aimed at optimising medication prescribing and/or adherence in older adults with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review was undertaken. Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were searched using relevant search terms (e.g. cancer, older adults). Eligible studies evaluated interventions seeking to improve medication prescribing and/or adherence in older adults (≥65 years) with cancer using a comparative evaluation. All outcomes for studies that met inclusion criteria were included in the review. Extracted data were collated using tables and accompanying narrative descriptive summaries. The review was reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines.

RESULTS

Nine studies met inclusion criteria comprising five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and four before-and-after study designs. Studies were primarily conducted in oncology clinics, ranging from single study sites to 109 oncology clinics. Sample sizes ranged between 33 and 4844 patients. Interventions most commonly involved patient education (n = 6) delivered by pharmacists or nurses. Three studies reported on prescribing-related outcomes and seven studies reported on adherence-related outcomes, using different terminology and assessment methods. Prescribing-related outcomes focused on medication appropriateness (using Beers criteria) and drug-related problems including drug interactions. Adherence-related outcomes included assessments of self-reported medication adherence and calculation of patients' medication possession ratio.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review highlights a lack of robust evaluations of interventions aimed at optimising medication prescribing and adherence in older adults with cancer. Future research should improve rigour during intervention development, evaluation and reporting in order to generate findings that could inform future practice.

The effect of medications associated with drug-induced pancreatitis on pancreatic cancer risk: A nested case-control study of routine Scottish data

BACKGROUND

Inflammation plays a role in pancreatic cancer. Many medications cause pancreatic inflammation, with some leading to a diagnosis of drug-induced pancreatitis (DIP), but few studies have examined these medications and pancreatic cancer risk. We therefore investigated the associations between pancreatic cancer risk and commonly-prescribed medicines for which there is strongest evidence of DIP.

METHODS

A nested case-control study was undertaken using the Primary Care Clinical Informatics Unit Research database containing general practice (GP) records from Scotland. Pancreatic cancer cases, diagnosed between 1999 and 2011, were identified and matched with up to five controls (based on age, gender, GP practice and date of registration). Medicines in the highest category of evidence for DIP, based on a recent systematic review, and used by more than 2 % of controls were identified. Odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for associations with pancreatic cancer were calculated using conditional logistic regression after adjusting for comorbidities.

RESULTS

There were 1,069 cases and 4,729 controls. Thirteen medicines in the highest category of evidence for DIP were investigated. There was little evidence of an association between any of these medications and pancreatic cancer risk apart from metronidazole (adjusted OR 1.69, 95 % CI 1.18, 2.41) and ranitidine (adjusted OR 1.37, 95 %CI 1.10, 1.70). However, no definitive exposure-response relationships between these medicines and cancer risk were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

There is little evidence that commonly-prescribed medicines associated with inflammation of the pancreas are also associated with pancreatic cancer. These findings should provide reassurance to patients and prescribing clinicians.

An exploration of community pharmacists’ experience, knowledge and perspectives of frailty and medicines optimisation in frail older people: A qualitative study

Introduction

Frailty is a heightened state of vulnerability due to an accumulation of age-related defects in separate physiological systems (1). Frailty is becoming increasingly common, with up to 50% of older adults being diagnosed with mild, moderate or severe frailty (35%, 12% and 3% respectively) (2). Community pharmacists may often be the primary healthcare professional with whom frail older people have most frequent contact due to their convenience and accessibility. Therefore, it is hypothesised that community pharmacists could play a wider role in frailty identification and medicines optimisation for frail older people.

Aim

To explore community pharmacists’ knowledge of frailty and its assessment, their experiences and contact with frail older patients in the community pharmacy setting, and their perceptions of their role in optimising medicines for frail older people.

Methods

Two strategies were used to recruit community pharmacists registered in Northern Ireland (NI). Community pharmacists were recruited through the Pharmacy Forum NI bi-monthly newsletter and the School of Pharmacy Undergraduate Placement Network, followed by snowballing. The interview topic guide was developed based on the published literature, current frailty guidelines and through discussion within the research team; it was piloted with four pharmacists. Semi-structured interviews commenced in March 2020. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, face-to-face interviews were logistically not possible, therefore telephone interviews were conducted at a time convenient to participants. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

Results

To date, 14 interviews have been conducted, lasting between 24 and 72 minutes. Apart from one interview, all were conducted over the telephone. Participant characteristics are summarised in Table 1. Analysis of interview transcripts is ongoing. Findings to date have highlighted the key role community pharmacists feel they play in assisting frail older patients with their medicines (especially during the current pandemic). Many saw themselves as a ‘point of contact’ for frail older people and highlighted the holistic approaches they used to care of such patients: “It’s easier to get in contact with us than other healthcare professionals and we tend to be the first port of call really” [CP2]. Interviews highlighted a lack of pharmacist knowledge surrounding frailty as a condition and its assessment, with participants primarily focusing on the physical aspects of frailty (e.g. weight loss, weakness) when observing or ‘informally assessing’ patients. None of the participants reported formally assessing their patients using validated frailty tools or checklists: “It’s not something that I’ve ever thought about. We don’t have any tools readily available to us that I know of and certainly nothing that would be standardised” [CP1].

Conclusion

This study has highlighted that community pharmacists felt they could contribute to optimising medicines for frail older people. However, the findings emphasise the need for more formal training for community pharmacists about the clinical aspects of frailty, frailty assessment and future interventions to address the medicines-related issues they have encountered with this patient population.

References

1. Shaw RL, Gwyther H, Holland C, Bujnowska M, Kurpas D, Cano A, et al. Understanding frailty: meanings and beliefs about screening and prevention across key stakeholder groups in Europe. Ageing & Society. 2018;38(6): 1223–1252.

2. Hollinghurst J, Fry R, Akbari A, Clegg A, Lyons RA, Watkins A, et al. External validation of the electronic Frailty Index using the population of Wales within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. Age and Ageing. 2019;48(6): 922–926.

A cross-sectional survey of general practitioners’ experiences with, views of, and attitudes towards, practice-based pharmacists

Introduction

Five-year pilot schemes were announced in both England and Northern Ireland (NI) to integrate practice-based pharmacists (PBPs) into general practices. The NI scheme anticipates that there will be 300 whole time equivalent PBPs in post by the end of the pilot (2020/2021).[1] There is little existing UK literature on PBPs’ role evolution and few studies have explored general practitioners’ (GPs) experiences of pharmacist integration into primary care practice.

Aim

To investigate GPs’ experiences with PBPs, their views about the PBP role and its impact upon patients and GPs, and their attitudes towards collaboration with PBPs.

Methods

A paper-based self-administered questionnaire was mailed to all general practices (n=329) across Northern Ireland (NI) on two occasions during September and October 2019, and was completed by one GP in every practice who had most contact with the PBP. The questionnaire was developed following a comprehensive literature review and comprised four sections (Table 1). Descriptive analyses were conducted using SPSS v26 and responses to open-ended questions were analysed thematically.

Results

The response rate was 61.7% (203/329). Respondents had a median age of 52.0 years and there was at least one PBP per general practice. All GPs had face-to-face meetings with PBPs, with three-quarters (78.7%, n=159) meeting with the PBP more than once a week. GPs reported that two-thirds of PBPs (62.4%, n=126) were qualified as independent prescribers, with 76.2% of prescribers (n=96) currently prescribing for patients. The most common PBP activities were medication reconciliation and medication reviews. The majority of GPs reported that PBPs always/very often had the required clinical skills (83.6%, n=162) and knowledge (87.0%, n=167) to provide safe and effective care for patients. However, only 31.1% (n=61) stated that PBPs sometimes had the confidence to make clinical decisions. The majority of GPs (&gt;85%) displayed largely positive attitudes towards collaboration with PBPs. Most respondents agreed/strongly agreed that PBPs will have a positive impact on patient outcomes (95.0%, n=192) and can provide a better link between general practices and community pharmacists (96.1%, n=194). However, 24.8% of GPs (n=50) were unclear if the PBP role moved community pharmacists to the periphery of the primary care team. Thematic analysis of the open comments indicated that GPs were in favour of more PBP sessions and full-time posts.

Conclusion

This study has revealed that the majority of GPs had positive views and attitudes about the PBP role, its impact in primary care and collaboration with PBPs. The findings may have implications for future developments in order to extend integration of PBPs within general practice, including the enhancement of training in clinical skills and decision-making. Our target sample included all general practices within NI and the response rate enhanced generalisability at the practice level. However, the study sample was limited to NI, and some findings may not be relevant to other parts of the UK. Further work is required to explore PBPs’, community pharmacists’ and patients’ views of this role in general practice to corroborate study findings.

References

1. Strategic Leadership Group for Pharmacy. Practice-based pharmacists' statement. 2016. (Online) Available at: https://www.health-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/health/practice-based-pharmacists.pdf (accessed 06 Oct 2020).

2. Van C, Costa D, Mitchell B, Abbott P, Krass I. Development and validation of a measure and a model of general practitioner attitudes toward collaboration with pharmacists. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2013; 9(6): 688–699.

Development of a Core Outcome Set for clinical trials aimed at improving antimicrobial stewardship in care homes

Introduction

Diverse outcomes reported in clinical trials to improve antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in care homes has hindered evidence synthesis [1]. We previously reported that a number of outcomes for care home AMS which may be important to healthcare professionals and relatives of care home residents had not been measured in previous trials [2]. It is essential to generate a set of important outcomes (a core outcome set – COS) for future studies of AMS interventions in care homes.

Aim

To develop a COS for use in clinical trials aimed at improving AMS in care homes.

Methods

A refined inventory of outcomes for AMS interventions in care homes, compiled from a previous study [2], was presented in a three-round international Delphi consensus survey, followed by an online consensus exercise. Stakeholders engaged in AMS in care homes (e.g. healthcare professionals, representatives of care home residents) were invited to participate, having been identified through the research team’s contacts and knowledge of relevant organisations. A 9-point Likert scale was used during the consensus procedures and an outcome was included in the COS if 80% or more of participants scored between 7 and 9, and 15% or less scored between 1 and 3. Less stringent criteria for inclusion were also applied if the final COS comprised fewer than three outcomes. Subsequently, a suitable outcome measurement instrument (OMI) was selected for each outcome in the COS using the following steps: finding existing OMIs in the literature and consulting with experts, assessing the quality of OMIs, and selecting one OMI for each core outcome via a two-round international Delphi consensus exercise. Consent was obtained from all participants taking part in all consensus procedures.

Results

The initial inventory of 14 outcomes was presented to 82 international Delphi panellists from 17 countries in the first round who also suggested three additional outcomes. These 17 outcomes were rated again in two further rounds, with consensus achieved for ten outcomes. A subsequent online consensus exercise with twelve participants from Northern Ireland, including the research team, reached consensus to include five outcomes in the COS (Table 1). Regarding selection of OMIs for the COS, 17 OMIs were identified through literature searches and experts’ suggestions. Based on quality assessment, three OMIs - ‘Number of antimicrobial courses started per 1000 resident-days’, ‘Rate of antimicrobial days of therapy per 1000 resident-days’, and ‘Van Buul algorithms to evaluate appropriateness of initiating or withholding antibiotics’ - were selected for a two-round Delphi exercise with 59 participants from 16 countries. Consensus was reached to select two OMIs for the COS, as presented in Table 1.

Conclusion

This is the first study to develop a COS for use in clinical trials aimed at improving AMS in care homes. Although we recruited few representatives from advocacy groups for older people, care home staff and managers, there was common agreement for inclusion of a number of outcomes. This COS represents the minimum that should be used in research and trialists may consider exploring other outcomes as reported in previous studies.

References

1. Nguyen HQ, Tunney MM, Hughes CM. Interventions to Improve Antimicrobial Stewardship for Older People in Care Homes: A Systematic Review. Drugs and Aging. 2019;36(4):355–69.

2. Nguyen HQ, Bradley DT, Tunney MM, Hughes CM. Antimicrobial Stewardship in Care Homes: Outcomes of Importance to Stakeholders. J Hosp Infect. 2020 Jan 27;104(4):582–91.

Development of a core outcome set for clinical trials aimed at improving antimicrobial stewardship in care homes

Background

Diverse outcomes reported in clinical trials of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) interventions in care homes have hindered evidence synthesis. Our main objective was to develop a core outcome set (COS) for use in trials aimed at improving AMS in care homes.

Methods

A refined inventory of outcomes for AMS interventions in care homes, compiled from a previous study, was rated in a three-round international Delphi survey with 82 participants, using a nine-point Likert scale (from 1, unimportant, to 9, critical). This was followed by an online consensus exercise with 12 participants from Northern Ireland to finalise the COS content. Subsequently, a suitable outcome measurement instrument (OMI) was selected for each outcome in the COS by: identifying existing OMIs through a literature search and experts’ suggestions, assessing the quality of OMIs, and selecting one OMI for each core outcome via a two-round international Delphi survey with 59 participants.

Results

Of 14 outcomes initially presented, consensus was reached for inclusion of five outcomes in the COS after the three-round Delphi survey and the online consensus exercise, comprising the total number of antimicrobial courses prescribed, appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing, days of therapy per 1000 resident-days, rate of antimicrobial resistance, and mortality related to infection. Of 17 potential OMIs identified, three were selected for the two-round Delphi exercise after the quality assessment. Consensus was reached for selection of two OMIs for the COS.

Conclusion

This COS is recommended to be used in clinical trials aimed at improving AMS in care homes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13756-021-00925-8.

Potentially inappropriate prescribing in dementia, multi-morbidity and incidence of adverse health outcomes

IMPORTANCE

treatment of dementia in individuals with comorbidities is complex, leading to potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP). The impact of PIP in this population is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

to estimate the rate of PIP and its effect on adverse health outcomes (AHO).

DESIGN

retrospective cohort.

SETTING

primary care electronic health records linked to hospital discharge data from England.

SUBJECTS

11,175 individuals with dementia aged over 65 years in 2016 and 43,463 age- and sex-matched controls.

METHODS

Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions V2 defined PIP. Logistic regression tested associations with comorbidities at baseline, and survival analyses risk of incident AHO, adjusted for age, gender, deprivation and 14 comorbidities.

RESULTS

the dementia group had increased risk of PIP (73% prevalence; odds ratio [OR]: 1.92; confidence interval [CI]: 83-103%; P < 0.01) after adjusting for comorbidities. Most frequent PIP criteria were related to anti-cholinergic drugs and therapeutic duplication. Risk of PIP was higher in patients also diagnosed with coronary-heart disease (odds OR: 2.17; CI: 1.91-2.46; P < 0.01), severe mental illness (OR: 2.09; CI: 1.62-2.70; P < 0.01); and depression (OR: 1.81; CI: 1.62-2.01; P < 0.01). During follow-up (1 year), PIP was associated with increased all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 1.14; CI: 1.02-1.26; P < 0.02), skin ulcer and pressure sores (hazard ratio: 1.66; CI: 1.12-2.46; P < 0.01), falls (hazard ratio: 1.37; CI: 1.15-1.63; P < 0.01), anaemia (hazard ratio: 1.61; CI: 1.10-2.38; P < 0.02) and osteoporosis (hazard ratio: 1.62; CI: 1.02-2.57; P < 0.04).

CONCLUSION

patients with dementia frequently receive PIPs, and those who do are more likely to experience AHO. These results highlight the need to optimise medication in dementia patients, especially those with comorbidities.

The effect of a digital training tool to aid chest image interpretation: Hybridising eye tracking technology and a decision support tool

INTRODUCTION

Eye tracking technology, checklists and search strategies have been demonstrated as useful aids in image interpretation. A training tool was developed, by the research team, which included these features. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the training tool on participant image interpretation performance.

METHODS

The study was carried out with reporting radiographers who had either commenced training in chest image interpretation (n = 12) or were trained in musculoskeletal image interpretation (n = 23) (total n = 35). Participants were allocated to a control or intervention group. Participants completed an initial assessment at recruitment and re-attended nine months later for a follow-up assessment. The intervention group were given unlimited access to a digital training tool. During assessments participants interpreted 20 chest images whilst using eye tracking technology (total of 1400 images were interpreted). A confidence level was obtained from participants on their diagnosis and a questionnaire, to obtain demographic data, was completed following the assessment.

RESULTS

Improvements were seen in the confidence of intervention group participants (p < 0.05). False Positive (FP) scores decreased for both the control and intervention group (p < 0.05), this decrease was from 4.20 to 3.20 for the control group and from 5.87 to 3.27 for the intervention group. True Negative (TN) scores increased, from 5.13 to 6.73 for the intervention group (p < 0.05). Mean decision time decreased for both the control and intervention group.

CONCLUSION

The tool led to positive effects on participant performance and could be a useful aid in chest image interpretation learning.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Improvements in performance were observed with a digital tool. The tool could improve image interpretation methods and training.

Brief interventions targeting long-term benzodiazepine and Z-drug use in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness of brief interventions in primary care aimed at reducing or discontinuing long-term benzodiazepine/Z-drug (BZRA) use.

METHOD

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of brief interventions in primary care settings aimed at reducing or discontinuing long-term BZRA use in adults taking BZRAs for ≥ 3 months. Four electronic databases were searched: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL. The primary outcome was BZRA use, classified as discontinuation or reduction by ≥ 25%. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to retrospectively code behavioural determinants targeted by the interventions. The Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy was used to identify the interventions' active components. Study-specific estimates were pooled, where appropriate, to yield summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Pearson's correlations were used to determine the relationship between intervention effect size and the results of both the TDF and BCT coding.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included (n = 2071 patients). Compared with usual care, intervention patients were more likely to have discontinued BZRA use at 6 months (eight studies, RR = 2.73, 95% CI = 1.84-4.06) and 12 months post-intervention (two studies, RR = 3.41, 95% CI = 2.22-5.25). TDF domains 'knowledge', 'memory, attention and decision processes', 'environmental context and resources' and 'social influences' were identified as having been included in every intervention. Commonly identified BCTs included 'information about health consequences', 'credible source' and 'adding objects to the environment'. There was no detectable relationship between effect size and the results of either the TDF or BCT coding.

CONCLUSION

Brief interventions delivered in primary care are more effective than usual care in reducing and discontinuing long-term benzodiazepine/Z-drug use.

Managing medicines in the time of COVID-19: implications for community-dwelling people with dementia

COVID-19 has changed life beyond recognition for millions of individuals, as countries implement social distancing measures to prevent disease transmission. For certain patient groups, such as community-dwelling older people with dementia (PwD), these restrictions may have far-reaching consequences. Medicines management may be adversely affected and deserves careful thought. PwD face unique challenges with medicines management compared to other older people, often relying upon support from family/carers and primary healthcare professionals. This article considers potential issues that PwD may face with each component of medicines management (prescribing, dispensing, administration, adherence, review), and based on previous research, highlights strategies to support PwD and their carers during this time. Primary healthcare professionals must be attentive to medicines-related needs of community-dwelling PwD, particularly those living alone, both during the pandemic and as restrictions are lifted. Carers of PwD continue to have a critical role to play in medicines management, and also require support.

Application of the intervention Complexity Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews within a Cochrane review: an illustrative case study

Background: The intervention Complexity Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews (iCAT_SR) has been developed to facilitate detailed assessments of intervention complexity in systematic reviews. Worked examples of the tool’s application are needed to promote its use and refinement. The aim of this case study was to apply the iCAT_SR to a subset of 20 studies included in a Cochrane review of interventions aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people.

Methods: Interventions were assessed independently by two authors using the six core iCAT_SR dimensions: (1) ‘Target organisational levels/categories’; (2) ‘Target behaviour/actions’; (3) ‘Active intervention components’; (4) ‘Degree of tailoring’; (5) ‘Level of skill required by intervention deliverers’; (6) ‘Level of skill required by intervention recipients’. Attempts were made to apply four optional dimensions: ‘Interaction between intervention components’; ‘Context/setting’; ‘Recipient/provider factors’; ‘Nature of causal pathway’. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using Cohen’s Kappa coefficient. Disagreements were resolved by consensus discussion. The findings are presented narratively.

Results: Assessments involving the core iCAT_SR dimensions showed limited consistency in intervention complexity across included studies, even when categorised according to clinical setting. Interventions were delivered across various organisational levels and categories (i.e. healthcare professionals and patients) and typically comprised multiple components. Intermediate skill levels were required by those delivering and receiving the interventions across all studies. A lack of detail in study reports precluded application of the iCAT_SR’s optional dimensions. The inter-rater reliability was substantial (Cohen's Kappa = 0.75)

Conclusions: This study describes the application of the iCAT_SR to studies included in a Cochrane systematic review. Future intervention studies need to ensure more detailed reporting of interventions, context and the causal pathways underlying intervention effects to allow a more holistic understanding of intervention complexity and facilitate replication in other settings. The experience gained has helped to refine the original guidance document relating to the application of iCAT_SR.

Systematic review and narrative synthesis of pharmacist provided medicines optimisation services in care homes for older people to inform the development of a generic training or accreditation process

OBJECTIVES

To develop a training programme to enable pharmacists with prescribing rights to assume responsibility for the provision of pharmaceutical care within care homes, a systematic review and narrative synthesis was undertaken to identify reported approaches to training pharmacists and use this literature to identify potential knowledge requirements.

METHODS

A PROSPERO-registered systematic review was performed using key search terms for care homes, pharmacist, education, training and pharmaceutical care. Papers reporting primary research focussed on care of the older person within the care home setting were included. No restrictions were placed on methodology. Two researchers independently reviewed titles, abstracts and papers. Agreement on inclusion was reached through consensus. Data on titles, training and activities undertaken were extracted and knowledge requirements identified. Findings were synthesised and reported narratively.

KEY FINDINGS

Fifty-nine papers were included, most of which were uncontrolled service evaluations. Four papers reported an accreditation process for the pharmacist. Thirteen papers reported providing tools or specific training on a single topic to pharmacists. The main clinical and therapeutic areas of activity (requiring codified knowledge) were dementia, pain, antipsychotic and cardiovascular medication. Provision of pharmaceutical care, effective multidisciplinary working and care home staff training represented the main areas of practical knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Information regarding training and accreditation processes for care home pharmacists is limited. This study provides insight into potential codified and practical knowledge requirements for pharmacists assuming responsibility for the provision of pharmaceutical care within care homes. Further work involving stakeholders is required to identify the cultural knowledge requirements and to develop a training and accreditation process.

Protocol for the process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of independent pharmacist prescribing in care home: the CHIPPS study

Background

Prescribing, monitoring and administration of medicines in care homes could be improved. A cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) is ongoing to evaluate the effectiveness of an independent prescribing pharmacist assuming responsibility for medicines management in care homes compared to usual care.

Aims and Objectives

To conduct a mixed-methods process evaluation of the RCT, in line with Medical Research Council (MRC) process evaluation guidance, to inform interpretation of main trial findings and if the service is found to be effective and efficient, to inform subsequent implementation.

Objectives

To describe the intervention as delivered in terms of quality, quantity, adaptations and variations across triads and time.

To explore the effects of individual intervention components on the primary outcomes.

To investigate the mechanisms of impact.

To describe the perceived effectiveness of relevant intervention components [including pharmacist independent prescriber (PIP) training and care home staff training] from participant [general practitioner (GP), care home, PIP and resident/relative] perspectives.

To describe the characteristics of GP, care home, PIP and resident participants to assess reach.

To estimate the extent to which intervention delivery is normalised among the intervention healthcare professionals and related practice staff.

Methods

A mix of quantitative (surveys, record reviews) and qualitative (interviews) approaches will be used to collect data on the extent of the delivery of detailed tasks required to implement the new service, to collect data to confirm the mechanism of impact as hypothesised in the logic model, to collect explanatory process and final outcome data, and data on contextual factors which could have facilitated or hindered effective and efficient delivery of the service.

Discussion

Recruitment is ongoing and the trial should complete in early 2020. The systematic and comprehensive approach that is being adopted will ensure data is captured on all aspects of the study, and allow a full understanding of the implementation of the service and the RCT findings. With so many interrelated factors involved it is important that a process evaluation is undertaken to enable us to identify which elements of the service were deemed to be effective, explain any differences seen, and identify enablers, barriers and future adaptions.

Trial registration

ISRCTN17847169.

Date registered: 15 December 2017.

The Association Between Drug Burden Index (DBI) and Health-Related Outcomes: A Longitudinal Study of the 'Oldest Old' (LiLACS NZ)

BACKGROUND

The prescribing of medications with anticholinergic and/or sedative properties is considered potentially inappropriate in older people (due to their side-effect profile), and the Drug Burden Index (DBI) is an evidence-based tool which measures exposure to these medications. Life and Living in Advanced Age: a Cohort Study in New Zealand (LiLACS NZ) is an ongoing longitudinal study investigating the determinants of healthy ageing. Using data from LiLACS NZ, this study aimed to determine whether a higher DBI was associated with poorer outcomes (hospitalisation, falls, mortality and cognitive function and functional status) over 36 months follow-up.

METHODS

LiLACS NZ consists of two cohorts: Māori (the indigenous population of New Zealand) aged ≥ 80 years and non-Māori aged 85 years at the time of enrolment. Data relating to regularly prescribed medications at baseline, 12 months and 24 months were used in this study. Medications with anticholinergic and/or sedative properties (i.e. medications with a DBI > 0) were identified using the Monthly Index of Medical Specialities (MIMS) medication formulary, New Zealand. DBI was calculated for everyone enrolled at each time point. The association between DBI at baseline and outcomes was evaluated throughout a series of 12-month follow-ups using negative binomial (hospitalisations and falls), Cox (mortality) and linear (cognitive function and functional status) regression analyses (significance p < 0.05). Regression models were adjusted for age, gender, general practitioner (GP) visits, socioeconomic deprivation, number of medicines prescribed and one of the following: prior hospitalisation, history of falls, baseline cognitive function [Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS)] or baseline functional status [Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL)].

RESULTS

Full demographic data were obtained for 671, 510 and 403 individuals at baseline, 12 months and 24 months, respectively. Overall, 31%, 30% and 34% of individuals were prescribed a medication with a DBI > 0 at baseline, 12 months and 24 months, respectively. At baseline and 12 months, non-Māori had a greater mean DBI (0.28 ± 0.5 and 0.27 ± 0.5, respectively) compared to Māori (0.16 ± 0.3 and 0.18 ± 0.5, respectively). At baseline, the most commonly prescribed medicines with a DBI > 0 were zopiclone, doxazosin, amitriptyline and codeine. In Māori, a higher DBI was significantly associated with a greater risk of mortality: at 36 months follow-up, adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)] 1.89 (1.11-3.20), p = 0.02. In non-Māori, a higher DBI was significantly associated with a greater risk of mortality [at 12 months follow-up, adjusted hazard ratio (95% CIs) 2.26 (1.09-4.70), p = 0.03] and impaired cognitive function [at 24 months follow-up, adjusted mean difference in 3MS score (95% CIs) 0.89 (- 3.89 to - 0.41), p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Using data from LiLACS NZ, a higher DBI was significantly associated with a greater risk of mortality (in Māori and non-Māori) and impaired cognitive function (in non-Māori). This highlights the importance of employing strategies to manage the prescribing of medications with a DBI > 0 in older adults.

Development of a complex community pharmacy intervention package using theory-based behaviour change techniques to improve older adults' medication adherence

BACKGROUND

To improve the effectiveness of interventions targeting non-adherence in older adults, a systematic approach to intervention design is required. The content of complex interventions and design decisions are often poorly described in published reports which makes it difficult to explore why they are ineffective. This intervention development study reports on the design of a community pharmacy-based adherence intervention using 11 Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs) which were identified from previous qualitative research with older patients using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

METHODS

Using a group consensus approach, a five-step design process was employed. This focused on decisions regarding: (1) the overall delivery format, (2) formats for delivering each BCT; (3) methods for tailoring BCTs to individual patients; (4) intervention structure; and (5) materials to support intervention delivery. The APEASE (Affordability; Practicability; Effectiveness/cost-effectiveness; Acceptability; Side effects/safety; Equity) criteria guided the selection of BCT delivery formats.

RESULTS

Formats for delivering the 11 BCTs were agreed upon, for example, a paper medicines diary was selected to deliver the BCT 'Self-monitoring of behaviour'. To help tailor the intervention, BCTs were categorised into 'Core' and 'Optional' BCTs. For example, 'Feedback on behaviour' and 'Action planning' were selected as 'Core' BCTs (delivered to all patients), whereas 'Prompts and cues' and 'Health consequences' were selected as 'Optional' BCTs. A paper-based adherence assessment tool was designed to guide intervention tailoring by mapping from identified adherence problems to BCTs. The intervention was designed for delivery over three appointments in the pharmacy including an adherence assessment at Appointment 1 and BCT delivery at Appointments 2 and 3.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper details key decision-making processes involved in moving from a list of BCTs through to a complex intervention package which aims to improve older patients' medication adherence. A novel approach to tailoring the content of a complex adherence intervention using 'Core' and 'Optional' BCT categories is also presented. The intervention is now ready for testing in a feasibility study with community pharmacists and patients to refine the content. It is hoped that this detailed report of the intervention content/design process will allow others to better interpret the future findings of this work.

On the frontline against COVID-19: Community pharmacists' contribution during a public health crisis

The global spread of COVID-19 is placing unprecedented demands on healthcare services. In this time of crisis, innovative and adaptive methods of practising will be required across all health professions. In order to maximise the use of current available resources, it is vital that existing services are comprehensively reviewed and full use is made of any unrealised potential among healthcare providers. Community pharmacy is one of a number of health professions that has a key role to play in responding to the current pandemic. As the scope of community pharmacy practice varies considerably across countries, it is important to examine ways in which the profession can assist with the public health response to COVID-19 and maintaining the continuity of healthcare services. This article seeks to highlight roles and activities that community pharmacists can undertake to help in relieving pressure on other areas of the health service, such as general practice. This information could help to inform future decisions about the restructuring of existing health services by governments, public health bodies and policy makers in response to public health crises such as COVID-19.

Enhancing community pharmacists' provision of medication adherence support to older adults: A mixed methods study using the Theoretical Domains Framework

BACKGROUND

Community pharmacists have an important role to play in providing medication adherence support (MAS) to older patients. However, research has shown that pharmacists rarely ask patients about adherence and offer limited solutions. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) can guide the selection of behaviour change techniques (BCTs), to enhance behaviours such as MAS provision.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to: (1) explore barriers/facilitators influencing community pharmacists' provision of MAS to older patients prescribed multiple medications; (2) Identify theoretical domains to target for behaviour change; (3) Select BCTs to deliver to pharmacists to enhance MAS provision.

METHOD

As part of a two-phase study, semi-structured interviews and a cross-sectional survey were conducted. In Phase 1, community pharmacists in Northern Ireland (NI) were recruited using purposive/snowball sampling. TDF-based interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed by two independent researchers using the framework method/content analysis. In Phase 2, a TDF-based postal survey was mailed to all community pharmacies in NI (n = 521) and analysed using descriptive statistics. Triangulated findings informed selection of target TDF domains and BCTs to deliver to enhance MAS provision.

RESULTS

Fifteen pharmacists were interviewed for Phase 1. Barriers and facilitators included inadequate remuneration, time and knowledge of solutions and professional confidence. In Phase 2, 143 (27.4%) survey responses were received. Potential barriers included inadequate training in motivational techniques and difficulties with decision-making. Based on triangulated findings, seven domains (e.g. skills, motivation/goals) were identified as targets and mapped across to 18 BCTs (e.g. behavioural practice/rehearsal, prompts/cues).

CONCLUSIONS

This mixed methods study provides unique perspectives on the wide range of barriers/facilitators that are perceived to influence the provision of MAS by community pharmacists. The 18 BCTs identified to target each of the seven key target domains identified in this study will be tested in a future pilot study of a patient-targeted intervention.

Improving medicines management for people with dementia in primary care: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals to develop a theory-informed intervention

BACKGROUND

People with dementia (PwD) face unique challenges with medicines management, yet little is known about these challenges from the perspectives of primary healthcare professionals, particularly general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists. Few medicines management interventions have been developed which are aimed at community-dwelling PwD. This study sought to develop an intervention to improve medicines management for PwD in primary care using a theory-informed approach.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs (n = 15) and community pharmacists (n = 15) to explore participants' views and experiences of medicines management for PwD, and their perceptions of barriers and facilitators to successful medicines management for PwD. The 14-domain Theoretical Domains Framework was the underpinning theoretical guide, allowing key theoretical domains to be identified and mapped to behaviour change techniques (BCTs) which are considered the 'active ingredients' of an intervention. Draft interventions were developed to operationalise selected BCTs and were presented to GPs and community pharmacists during task groups. Final selection of an intervention for feasibility testing was guided by feedback provided during these task groups and through application of the APEASE (Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness/cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects/safety, Equity) criteria.

RESULTS

Participants expressed a number of concerns about medicines management for PwD, particularly monitoring adherence to medication regimens and conducting medication review. Two draft interventions comprising selected BCTs ('Modelling or demonstration of behaviour'; 'Salience of consequences'; 'Health consequences'; 'Social and environmental consequences'; 'Action planning'; Social support or encouragement', 'Self-monitoring of behaviour') were developed, each targeting GPs and community pharmacists. Following the task groups and discussions within the research team, the community pharmacy-based intervention was selected for future feasibility testing. The intervention will target community pharmacists to conduct a medication review (incorporating an adherence check) with a PwD, delivered as an online video demonstrating key behaviours. The video will include feedback emphasising positive outcomes of performing the behaviours. Action planning and a quick reference guide will be used as complementary intervention components.

CONCLUSIONS

A community pharmacist-based intervention has been developed targeting medicines management for PwD in primary care using a systematic, theory-informed approach. Future work will determine the usability and acceptability of implementing this intervention in clinical practice.