Use of a Deprescribing Tool in an Interdisciplinary Primary-Care Patient-Aligned Care Team

Objective: To pilot the VIONE approach in a single Primary Care Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT). The authors aim for the Clinical Pharmacy Specialist (CPS) to perform 20 comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) and the pilot PACT physician (PCP) to complete 200 VIONE discontinuations. Cost avoidance and CPS recommendations will also be analyzed. Polypharmacy is associated with increased risk of adverse drug events, falls, hospitalizations, and death. VIONE is a deprescribing tool that assists providers in identifying inappropriate medications. Design: Quality Improvement Setting: Single VA Health Care System (VAHCS) Participants: High-risk veterans in pilot PACT Interventions: The CPS educated the PCP regarding VIONE methodology and assisted with CMRs. When deprescribing was warranted, VIONE discontinuation reasons were selected in the Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS). Data were electronically stored in a national dashboard. Results: The authors identified 231 veterans at risk for polypharmacy-related adverse events. The PCP and CPS were able to reach 99 veterans and make 136 medication discontinuations between September 1, 2019, and March 1, 2020. The CPS performed 20 CMRs, resulting in 90 deprescribing recommendations. Thirty-eight CPS recommendations were accepted and contributed $18,835.95 to the sum annualized cost avoidance of $21,904.80. Conclusion: The VIONE methodology was successfully implemented in the pilot PACT. The utilization of the CPS was associated with an increased average number of medication discontinuations per veteran and contributed to cost avoidance.

The impact of high-risk medications on mortality risk among older adults with polypharmacy: evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing

Background Polypharmacy is common among older people and is associated with an increased mortality risk. However, little is known about whether the mortality risk is related to specific medications among older adults with polypharmacy. This study therefore aimed to investigate associations between high-risk medications and all-cause and cause-specific mortality among older adults with polypharmacy. Methods This study included 1356 older adults with polypharmacy (5+ long-term medications a day for conditions or symptoms) from Wave 6 (2012/2013) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. First, using the agglomerative hierarchical clustering method, participants were grouped according to the use of 14 high-risk medication categories. Next, the relationship between the high-risk medication patterns and all-cause and cause-specific mortality (followed up to April 2018) was examined. All-cause mortality was assessed by Cox proportional hazards model and competing-risk regression was employed for cause-specific mortality. Results Five high-risk medication patterns—a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors cluster, a mental health drugs cluster, a central nervous system (CNS) drugs cluster, a RAAS inhibitors and antithrombotics cluster, and an antithrombotics cluster—were identified. The mental health drugs cluster showed increased risks of all-cause (HR = 1.55, 95%CI = 1.05, 2.28) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) (SHR = 2.11, 95%CI = 1.10, 4.05) mortality compared with the CNS drug cluster over 6 years, while others showed no differences in mortality. Among these patterns, the mental health drugs cluster showed the highest prevalence of antidepressants (64.1%), benzodiazepines (10.4%), antipsychotics (2.4%), antimanic agents (0.7%), opioids (33.2%), and muscle relaxants (21.5%). The findings suggested that older adults with polypharmacy who took mental health drugs (primarily antidepressants), opioids, and muscle relaxants were at higher risk of all-cause and CVD mortality, compared with those who did not take these types of medications. Conclusions This study supports the inclusion of opioids in the current guidance on structured medication reviews, but it also suggests that older adults with polypharmacy who take psychotropic medications and muscle relaxants are prone to adverse outcomes and therefore may need more attention. The reinforcement of structured medication reviews would contribute to early intervention in medication use which may consequently reduce medication-related problems and bring clinical benefits to older adults with polypharmacy.

Medical/Pharmacy Students Interprofessional Older Adult Medication Interactions/Contraindications Project

The University of New England College of Osteopathic Medicine (UNECOM) Geriatrics Education Mentors [GEM] program, established in 2014, pairs UNECOM students with older community living adults. GEM assignments focus on health review, medical humanities, and geriatrics training. Each year approximately 90 older adults participate in GEMs. In 2019, the GEM program was expanded with Geriatrics Workforce Enhancement Program (GWEP) grant funding to: include first year medical students, include 2 additional assignments (4 assignments over 10 months to 6 assignments over 18 months), and to create interprofessional student collaboration. In the new GEM Assignment 4: Medication Interactions/Contraindications, UNECOM students with their GEM compiled details on the GEM’s medication list (prescriptions, herbal, OTC); one of 4 Ms of Age Friendly Health Care. UNECOM students (84 pairs) were then assigned to UNE School of Pharmacy (SOP) students (42 SOP students had 2 UNECOM pairs) to conduct a “Lexicomp” (App) medication interactions and Beers Criteria review. UNECOM students documented findings with the SOP student partner; discussed the processes of review with their GEM and the resultant findings; documented the GEM’s questions and how the UNECOM student answered those questions; and discussed next steps for the GEM regarding options for different medications - especially follow up with their prescribing physician(s) for any noted interactions/contraindications. For GEMs with few medications, a mock medication list was assigned to ensure student experiences with medication reviews and GEM discussion. Although time intensive preparation is required, UNECOM & SOP students attained significant learning as did the GEM mentors.

Assessment of the potential impact of resolving drug-related problems by clinical pharmacists in Japan: a retrospective observational study

Background Clinical pharmacists play a role in limiting the disadvantages of pharmacotherapy for patients by detecting and resolving drug-related problems (DRPs) through medication reviews. Although their contributions to patient care have been analyzed and understood in various countries, the role of Japanese clinical pharmacists in this context remains to be clearly elucidated. Thus, in this study, we aimed to elucidate the detection of DRPs by clinical pharmacists and determine the potential impact of pharmacist interventions in Japan. Methods This study was conducted in a 273-bed hospital and targeted hospitalized patients over a period of 6 months. DRPs detected by clinical pharmacists during the study period were investigated and classified into 10 types. Furthermore, medications were categorized according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification. A review committee consisting of two pharmacists independently reviewed the pharmacist interventions on a six-point scale (extremely significant, very significant, significant, somewhat significant, no significance, adverse significance) according to the potential impact on patient care. Results During the study period, 1711 patients (mean age: 71.2 years, 54.1% male) were included, and 2149 DRPs were detected (1.26 DRPs/patient). Pharmacists intervened in all the DRPs detected. The most common DRP was supratherapeutic dosage (19.3%), followed by untreated indication (18.1%). The most common medication classification causing DRPs was “Antiinfectives for Systemic Use” (25.1%), followed by “Alimentary Tract and Metabolism” (19.9%). Most of the pharmacist interventions (99.6%) were rated “somewhat significant” or more significant, of which 1.1% were rated “extremely significant,” and none were rated as “adverse significance.” Conclusions Our results show that in Japan, as in other countries, clinical pharmacists detect and resolve DRPs in hospitalized patients through medication review. Our findings also show that clinical pharmacists have a positive impact on patient care and suggest the need for their involvement.

Medication Management and the Role of the Geriatric Pharmacist in Interdisciplinary Care Teams

Among adults 65 and older, 30% are taking at least five medications to treat acute and chronic health conditions (Gavin, 2020). As the number of medications increases, the more complex the regimen tends to be, which increases risks with proper management and unwanted side effects. Our interdisciplinary geriatric assessment team has been conducting medication reviews for individuals living with dementia, where geriatric pharmacists meet with these individuals and their family caregiver. These sessions build a trusting relationship, where older adults are able to receive education about their prescription and over-the-counter medications, address any concerns and reach shared goals. Pharmacists routinely recommend deprescribing, and all recommendations are sent to the older adults’ primary care provider. After the initial appointment, a follow-up takes place six months later to re-examine adherence to recommendations and assess outcomes. Since April 2019, our pharmacists have served over 300 individuals, where nearly 90% would recommend this review to others. Pharmacists have recommended over 250 medication changes, averaging 2.53 per person. A statistically significant decrease in prescription medications (from 12.48 to 12.16) has been identified, in addition to a trending decline for over-the-counter medications (3.91 to 3.79). Medication reviews have successfully reduced the overall number of medications, as 36% of recommendations have been accepted by the patient and their healthcare provider. Comprehensive medication review programs, where pharmacists are integrated into an interdisciplinary care team, offer high quality, best practice healthcare, where safety and quality of life is improved for older adults.

Medications and Falls Experiences among Older People

Purpose: This study aimed to identify the status of drug use and analyze the effects of drug use on falls among older people.Methods: The data were collected from 285 community-dwelling older persons through interviewing with questionnaires and checking participants’ medication prescriptions and the drugs using the Korea Pharmaceutical Information Center’s (KPIC) website. The medications were classified into anatomical and therapeutic divisions based on the medications’ ingredients provided by the KPIC. x2 test, ANOVA, t-test, and logistic regressions were applied to analyze the data.Results: The finding showed that 81.4% of the older adults were taking medications. Older people taking antihyperlipidemic drugs were at 1.79 times higher risk for experiencing a fall (95% CI=1.01~3.16, p=.046), and hypnotic sedative and sleeping pills increased their fall risks 11.06 times (95% CI=1.27~96.07, p=.029) compared to those not taking the medications. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents showed a 2.74 odds ratio (95% CI=1.23~5.73, p=.013) and narcotic analgesics increased the fall experience risk 8.56 times (95% CI=1.02~71.88, p=.048). Those with chronic diseases experienced falls 3.04 times more than those without chronic diseases.Conclusion: The study findings showed medications might be one of the important influencing factors on fall risks among older adults. Raising awareness of fall risks associated with medicines through health education and medication reviews by health professionals should be considered a strategy for preventing older adults' falls.

Developing and piloting a self-assessment tool for medication review competence of practicing pharmacists based on nationally set competence criteria

Background New competence requirements have emerged for pharmacists as a result of changing societal needs towards more patient-centred practices. Today, medication review competence can be considered as basic pharmaceutical competence. Medication review specific competence criteria and tools for self-assessing the competence are essential in building competences and a shared understanding of medication reviews as a collaborative practice. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot a self-assessment tool for medication review competence among practicing pharmacists in Finland. Methods The development of the self-assessment tool was based on the national medication review competence criteria for pharmacists established in Finland in 2017 and piloting the tool among practicing pharmacists in a national online survey in October 2018. The pharmacists self-assessed their medication review competence with a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 for “very poor/not at all” to 5 for “very good”. Results The internal consistency of the self-assessment tool was high as the range of the competence areas’ Cronbach’s alpha was 0.953–0.973. The competence areas consisted of prescription review competence (20 items, Cronbach’s alpha 0.953), additional statements for medication review competence (11 additional items, Cronbach’s alpha 0.963) and medication review as a whole, including both the statements of prescription review and medication review competence (31 items, Cronbach’s alpha 0.973). Competence items closely related to routine dispensing were most commonly self-estimated to be mastered by the practicing pharmacists who responded (n = 344), while the more clinical and patient-centred competence items had the lowest self-estimates. This indicates that the self-assessment tool works logically and differentiates pharmacists according to competence. The self-assessed medication review competence was at a very good or good level among more than half (55%) of the respondents (n = 344). Conclusion A self-assessment tool for medication review competence was developed and validated. The piloted self-assessment tool can be used for regular evaluation of practicing pharmacists’ medication review competence which is becoming an increasingly important basis for their contribution to patient care and society.