Stakeholder perceptions of and attitudes towards problematic polypharmacy and prescribing cascades: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Problematic polypharmacy is the prescribing of five or more medications potentially inappropriately. Unintentional prescribing cascades represent an under-researched aspect of problematic polypharmacy and occur when an adverse drug reaction (ADR) is misinterpreted as a new symptom resulting in the initiation of a new medication. The aim of this study was to elicit key stakeholders' perceptions of and attitudes towards problematic polypharmacy, with a focus on prescribing cascades. METHODS: qualitative one-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with predefined key stakeholder groups. Inductive thematic analysis was employed. RESULTS: Thirty-one stakeholders were interviewed: six patients, two carers, seven general practitioners, eight pharmacists, four hospital doctors, two professional organisation representatives and two policymakers. Three main themes were identified: (i) ADRs and prescribing cascades-a necessary evil. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) expressed concern that experiencing an ADR would negatively impact patients' confidence in their doctor. However, patients viewed ADRs pragmatically as an unpredictable risk. (ii) Balancing the risk/benefit tipping point. The complexity of prescribing decisions in the context of polypharmacy made balancing this tipping point challenging. Consequently, HCPs avoided medication changes. (iii) The minefield of medication reconciliation. Stakeholders, including patients and carers, viewed medication reconciliation as a perilous activity due to systemic communication deficits. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders believed that at a certain depth of polypharmacy, the risk that a new symptom is being caused by an existing medication becomes incalculable. Therefore, in the absence of harm, medication changes were avoided. However, medication reconciliation post hospital discharge compelled prescribing decisions and was seen as a high-risk activity by stakeholders.

Risk and protective factors for suicidality among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) young people, from countries with a high global acceptance index (GAI), within the context of the socio-ecological model: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) young people experience higher prevalence rates of suicidality than their heterosexual and/or cisgender peers. However, there is limited research that can inform suicide prevention efforts. Our aim was to synthesize quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research on risk and protective factors among LGBTQ+ young people, from countries with a high Global Acceptance Index. METHODS: A scoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage framework, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews protocol. Five databases and grey literature were searched for relevant studies. Identified factors were clustered by thematic type, according to the socio-ecological model to identify empirical trends and knowledge gaps. The mixed methods appraisal tool was used for quality assessment of studies. RESULTS: Sixty-six studies met our inclusion criteria. Overall, 59 unique risk factors and 37 unique protective factors were identified. Key risk factors include past suicidality, adverse childhood experiences, internalized queerphobia, minority stress, interpersonal violence, bullying, familial conflict, and anti-LGBTQ+ policies/legislation. Key protective factors include self-affirming strategies, adult/peer support, at-school safety, access to inclusive healthcare, family connectedness, positive coming out experiences, gender-affirming services and LGBTQ+ inclusive policies and legislation. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our findings affirm that multiple risk and protective factors, at all levels of the socio-ecological model, interact in complex, unique and diverse ways upon suicidality among LGBTQ+ young people. Implications for suicide prevention are discussed. Further empirical studies are required, particularly at the communities, policies, and societal levels of the socio-ecological model, and these studies should include a focus on protective factors and significant within-group differences.

Exploring the Multidimensional Relationship Between Medication Beliefs and Adherence to Medications Among Older Adults Living With Multimorbidity Using Polynomial Regression: An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: People living with multimorbidity may hold complex beliefs about medicines, potentially influencing adherence. Polynomial regression offers a novel approach to examining the multidimensional relationship between medication beliefs and adherence, overcoming limitations associated with difference scores. PURPOSE: To explore the multidimensional relationship between medication beliefs and adherence among people living with multimorbidity. METHODS: Secondary analysis was conducted using observational data from a cohort of older adults living with ≥2 chronic conditions, recruited from 15 family practices in Ireland in 2010 (n = 812) and followed up in 2012 (n = 515). Medication beliefs were measured with the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire-Specific. Adherence was assessed with the medication possession ratio using prescription data from the national primary care reimbursement service. Polynomial regression was used to explore the best-fitting multidimensional models for the relationship between (i) beliefs and adherence at baseline, and (ii) beliefs at baseline and adherence at follow-up. RESULTS: Confirmatory polynomial regression rejected the difference-score model, and exploratory polynomial regression indicated quadratic models for both analyses. Reciprocal effects were present in both analyses (slope [Analysis 1]: ß = 0.08, p = .007; slope [Analysis 2]: ß = 0.07, p = .044), indicating that adherence was higher when necessity beliefs were high and concern beliefs were low. Nonreciprocal effects were also present in both analyses (slope [Analysis 1]: ß = 0.05, p = .006; slope [Analysis 2]: ß = 0.04, p = .043), indicating that adherence was higher when both necessity and concern beliefs were high. CONCLUSIONS: Among people living with multimorbidity, there is evidence that the relationship between medication beliefs and adherence is multidimensional. Attempts to support adherence should consider the combined role of necessity and concern beliefs.

When people live with multiple ongoing health conditions, they might have complex beliefs about their prescribed medicines. These beliefs could relate to the perceived necessity of medicines (necessity beliefs) and perceived concerns about medicines (concern beliefs). This study aimed to explore how necessity and concern beliefs, in combination, relate to the extent to which people living with multiple ongoing conditions take their medicines as prescribed. The study analyzed an existing dataset that included 812 older adults recruited via family practice settings in Ireland in 2010. Of these, 515 people were followed up again in 2012. All participants were living with at least two ongoing health conditions. Participants self-reported their medication-related necessity and concern beliefs by completing a questionnaire. Their level of medication taking was calculated using pharmacy records. The results showed that having a combination of high necessity beliefs and low concern beliefs was related to higher levels of medication taking than having a combination of low necessity beliefs and high concern beliefs. Having a combination of high necessity beliefs and high concern beliefs was related to higher levels of medication taking than having a combination of low necessity beliefs and low concern beliefs. Attempts to support patients to take their medicines should consider the combined role of their necessity and concern beliefs on behavior.

The impact of lidocaine plaster prescribing reduction strategies: A comparison of two national health services in Europe.

AIMS: In 2017, two distinct interventions were implemented in Ireland and England to reduce prescribing of lidocaine medicated plasters. In Ireland, restrictions on reimbursement were introduced through implementation of an application system for reimbursement. In England, updated guidance on items which should not be routinely prescribed in primary care, including lidocaine plasters, was published. This study aims to compare how the interventions impacted prescribing of lidocaine plasters in these countries. METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time-series study using general practice data. For Ireland, monthly dispensing data (2015-2019) from the means-tested General Medical Services (GMS) scheme was used. For England, data covered all patients. Outcomes were the rate of dispensings, quantity and costs of lidocaine plasters, and we modelled level and trend changes from the first full month of the policy/guidance change. RESULTS: Ireland had higher rates of lidocaine dispensings compared to England throughout the study period; this was 15.22/1000 population immediately pre-intervention, and there was equivalent to a 97.2% immediate reduction following the intervention. In England, the immediate pre-intervention dispensing rate was 0.36/1000, with an immediate reduction of 0.0251/1000 (a 5.8% decrease), followed by a small but significant decrease in the monthly trend relative to the pre-intervention trend of 0.0057 per month. CONCLUSIONS: Among two different interventions aiming to decrease low-value lidocaine plaster prescribing, there was a substantially larger impact in Ireland of reimbursement restriction compared to issuing guidance in England. However, this is in the context of much higher baseline rates of use in Ireland compared to England.

A scoping review of evidence-based guidance and guidelines published by general practice professional organizations.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) need robust, up-to-date evidence to deliver high-quality patient care. There is limited literature regarding the role of international GP professional organizations in developing and publishing clinical guidelines to support GPs clinical decision making. OBJECTIVE: To identify evidence-based guidance and clinical guidelines produced by GP professional organizations and summarize their content, structure, and methods of development and dissemination. METHODS: Scoping review of GP professional organizations following Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. Four databases were searched and a grey literature search was conducted. Studies were included if they were: (i) evidence-based guidance documents or clinical guidelines produced de novo by a national GP professional organization, (ii) developed to support GPs clinical care, and (iii) published in the last 10 years. GP professional organizations were contacted to provide supplementary information. A narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Six GP professional organizations and 60 guidelines were included. The most common de novo guideline topics were mental health, cardiovascular disease, neurology, pregnancy and women's health and preventive care. All guidelines were developed using a standard evidence-synthesis method. All included documents were disseminated through downloadable pdfs and peer review publications. GP professional organizations indicated that they generally collaborate with or endorse guidelines developed by national or international guideline producing bodies. CONCLUSION: The findings of this scoping review provide an overview of de novo guideline development by GP professional organizations and can support collaboration between GP organizations worldwide thus reducing duplication of effort, facilitating reproducibility, and identifying areas of standardization. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JXQ26.

Clinician consensus on "Inappropriate" presentations to the Emergency Department in the Better Data, Better Planning (BDBP) census: a cross-sectional multi-centre study of emergency department utilisation in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Utilisation of the Emergency Department (ED) for non-urgent care increases demand for services, therefore reducing inappropriate or avoidable attendances is an important area for intervention in prevention of ED crowding. This study aims to develop a consensus between clinicians across care settings about the "appropriateness" of attendances to the ED in Ireland. METHODS: The Better Data, Better Planning study was a multi-centre, cross-sectional study investigating factors influencing ED utilisation in Ireland. Data was compiled in patient summary files which were assessed for measures of appropriateness by an academic General Practitioner (GP) and academic Emergency Medicine Consultant (EMC) National Panel. In cases where consensus was not reached charts were assessed by an Independent Review Panel (IRP). At each site all files were autonomously assessed by local GP-EMC panels. RESULTS: The National Panel determined that 11% (GP) to 38% (EMC) of n = 306 lower acuity presentations could be treated by a GP within 24-48 h (k = 0.259; p < 0.001) and that 18% (GP) to 35% (EMC) of attendances could be considered "inappropriate" (k = 0.341; p < 0.001). For attendances deemed "appropriate" the admission rate was 47% compared to 0% for "inappropriate" attendees. There was no consensus on 45% of charts (n = 136). Subset analysis by the IRP determined that consensus for appropriate attendances ranged from 0 to 59% and for inappropriate attendances ranged from 0 to 29%. For the Local Panel review (n = 306) consensus on appropriateness ranged from 40 to 76% across ED sites. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary clinicians agree that "inappropriate" use of the ED in Ireland is an issue. However, obtaining consensus on appropriateness of attendance is challenging and there was a significant cohort of complex heterogenous presentations where agreement could not be reached by clinicians in this study. This research again demonstrates the complexity of ED crowding, the introduction of evidence-based care pathways targeting avoidable presentations may serve to alleviate the problem in our EDs.

Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Acute Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: A Literature Review.

Dysphagia (swallowing impairment) is a frequent complication of cervical spinal cord injury (cSCI). Recently published national guidance in the UK on rehabilitation after traumatic injury confirmed that people with cSCI are at risk for dysphagia and require early evaluation while remaining nil by mouth [National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Rehabilitation after traumatic injury (NG211), 2022, https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng21 ]. While the pathogenesis and pathophysiology of dysphagia in cSCI remains unclear, numerous risk factors have been identified in the literature. This review aims to summarize the literature on the risk factors, presentation, assessment, and management of dysphagia in patients with cSCI. A bespoke approach to dysphagia management, that accounts for the multiple system impairment in cSCI, is presented; the overarching aim of which is to support effective management of dysphagia in patients with cSCI to prevent adverse clinical consequences.

Are we there yet?' Distance to definitive care for Irish patients in the Better Data, Better Planning (BDBP) study.

BACKGROUND: Residing long distances from definitive care compromises patient safety and, in rural Ireland, travel distance to health care can be substantial, particularly in light of national General Practitioner (GP) shortages and hospital reconfigurations. The aim of this research is to describe the profile of patients attending Irish Emergency Departments (EDs) in terms of distance from GP care and definitive care in the ED. METHOD: The 'Better Data, Better Planning' (BDBP) census was a multi-centre, cross-sectional study of n=5 urban and rural EDs in Ireland throughout 2020. At each site, all adults presenting over a 24-h census period were eligible for inclusion. Data were collected on demographics, healthcare utilisation, service awareness and factors influencing the decision to attend the ED, with analysis in SPSS. RESULTS: For n=306 participants, median distance to a GP was 3 km (range 1-100 km) and median distance to the ED was 15 km (range 1-160km). Most participants (n=167, 58%) lived within 5 km of their GP and within 10 km of the ED (n=114, 38%). However, 8% of patients lived ≥15 km from their GP and 9% of patients lived ≥50 km from their nearest ED. Patients living >50 km from the ED were more likely to be transported by Ambulance (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Proximity to health services, by geographical location, is poorer in rural regions, so it's important that these patients have equity of access to definitive care. Therefore, expansion of alternative care pathways in the community and additional resourcing of the National Ambulance Service with enhanced aeromedical support is essential in the future.

GP-delivered medication review of polypharmacy, deprescribing, and patient priorities in older people with multimorbidity in Irish primary care (SPPiRE Study): A cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a rising prevalence of multimorbidity, particularly in older patients, and a need for evidence-based medicines management interventions for this population. The Supporting Prescribing in Older Adults with Multimorbidity in Irish Primary Care (SPPiRE) trial aimed to investigate the effect of a general practitioner (GP)-delivered, individualised medication review in reducing polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) in community-dwelling older patients with multimorbidity in primary care. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) set in 51 GP practices throughout the Republic of Ireland. A total of 404 patients, aged ≥65 years with complex multimorbidity, defined as being prescribed ≥15 regular medicines, were recruited from April 2017 and followed up until October 2020. Furthermore, 26 intervention GP practices received access to the SPPiRE website where they completed an educational module and used a template for an individualised patient medication review that identified PIP, opportunities for deprescribing, and patient priorities for care. A total of 25 control GP practices delivered usual care. An independent blinded pharmacist assessed primary outcome measures that were the number of medicines and the proportion of patients with any PIP (from a predefined list of 34 indicators based predominantly on the STOPP/START version 2 criteria). We performed an intention-to-treat analysis using multilevel modelling. Recruited participants had substantial disease and treatment burden at baseline with a mean of 17.37 (standard deviation [SD] 3.50) medicines. At 6-month follow-up, both intervention and control groups had reductions in the numbers of medicines with a small but significantly greater reduction in the intervention group (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.899 to 0.999, p = 0.045). There was no significant effect on the odds of having at least 1 PIP in the intervention versus control group (odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% CI: 0.140 to 1.064, p = 0.066). Adverse events recorded included mortality, emergency department (ED) presentations, and adverse drug withdrawal events (ADWEs), and there was no evidence of harm. Less than 2% of drug withdrawals in the intervention group led to a reported ADWE. Due to the inability to electronically extract data, primary outcomes were measured at just 2 time points, and this is the main limitation of this work. CONCLUSIONS: The SPPiRE intervention resulted in a small but significant reduction in the number of medicines but no evidence of a clear effect on PIP. This reduction in significant polypharmacy may have more of an impact at a population rather than individual patient level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12752680.

Optimising a person-centred approach to stopping medicines in older people with multimorbidity and polypharmacy using the DExTruS framework: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Tackling problematic polypharmacy requires tailoring the use of medicines to individual circumstances and may involve the process of deprescribing. Deprescribing can cause anxiety and concern for clinicians and patients. Tailoring medication decisions often entails beyond protocol decision-making, a complex process involving emotional and cognitive work for healthcare professionals and patients. We undertook realist review to highlight and understand the interactions between different factors involved in deprescribing and to develop a final programme theory that identifies and explains components of good practice that support a person-centred approach to deprescribing in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. METHODS: The realist approach involves identifying underlying causal mechanisms and exploring how, and under what conditions they work. We conducted a search of electronic databases which were supplemented by citation checking and consultation with stakeholders to identify other key documents. The review followed the key steps outlined by Pawson et al. and followed the RAMESES standards for realist syntheses. RESULTS: We included 119 included documents from which data were extracted to produce context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) and a final programme theory. Our programme theory recognises that deprescribing is a complex intervention influenced by a multitude of factors. The components of our final programme theory include the following: a supportive infrastructure that provides clear guidance around professional responsibilities and that enables multidisciplinary working and continuity of care, consistent access to high-quality relevant patient contextual data, the need to support the creation of a shared explanation and understanding of the meaning and purpose of medicines and a trial and learn approach that provides space for monitoring and continuity. These components may support the development of trust which may be key to managing the uncertainty and in turn optimise outcomes. These components are summarised in the novel DExTruS framework. CONCLUSION: Our findings recognise the complex interpretive practice and decision-making involved in medication management and identify key components needed to support best practice. Our findings have implications for how we design medication review consultations, professional training and for patient records/data management. Our review also highlights the role that trust plays both as a central element of tailored prescribing and a potential outcome of good practice in this area.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practice patterns of obstructive sleep apnea among speech-language pathologists.

INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common sleep-related breathing disorder characterised by repeated narrowing and closure of the upper airway during sleep. Despite growing evidence that dysphagia is a frequent sequela of OSA, the role of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in managing OSA remains unclear. The aim of this international study was to evaluate SLPs knowledge, attitudes, and experience of OSA. METHODS: A validated questionnaire, OSA Knowledge and Attitudes (OSAKA), was distributed to SLPs internationally via an online survey. Additional information on demographics, educational history, and clinical practices was ascertained. RESULTS: From a total of 1647 respondents, 822 clinicians from twenty-four countries were included in the final analysis. Knowledge of OSA among SLPs was limited; the mean (SD) rate of correct answers was 55% (22%). Over half of SLPs reported patients with OSA on their caseload, with the majority of patients referred for dysphagia services. Yet, only half of SLPs reported confidence in their ability to assess or manage dysphagia in patients with OSA. SLPs' experience of OSA had an effect on their knowledge and attitudes [F (2, 817) = 17.279, p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: SLPs are involved in the management of patients with OSA but are practising with limited knowledge and confidence. The findings highlight the need to increase OSA education and training for SLPs. In addition, there is a need for targeted research to increase the evidence base for development of clinical practice guidelines for dysphagia management in patients with OSA.

Patient and general practitioner experiences of implementing a medication review intervention in older people with multimorbidity: Process evaluation of the SPPiRE trial.

INTRODUCTION: The SPPiRE cluster randomized controlled trial found that a general practitioner (GP)-delivered medication review that incorporated screening for potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP), a brown bag review and a patient priority assessment, resulted in a significant but small reduction in the number of medicines and no significant reduction in PIP. This process evaluation aims to explore the experiences of GPs and patients and the potential for system-wide implementation. METHODS: The trial included 51 general practices and 404 participants with multimorbidity aged ≥65 years, prescribed ≥15 medicines. The process evaluation used mixed methods and ran parallel to the trial. Quantitative data was collected from the SPPiRE intervention website and analysed descriptively. Qualitative data on medication changes were collected from intervention GPs (18/26) and a purposive sample of intervention patients (27/208) via semi-structured telephone interviews. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis. Qualitative and quantitative data were integrated using a triangulation protocol. RESULTS: The analysis generated two themes, intervention implementation and mechanisms of action, and both were underpinned by the theme of context. Intervention delivery varied among practices and 45 patients (28%) had no review, primarily due to insufficient GP time. 80% of reviewed patients had ≥1 PIP identified, 59% had ≥1 problem identified during the brown bag review and 79% had ≥1 priority recorded. The brown bag review resulted in the most deprescription of medications. GPs and patients responded positively to the intervention but most GPs did not engage with the patient priority-setting process. GPs identified a lack of integration into practice software and resources as barriers to future implementation. CONCLUSION: The SPPiRE intervention had a small effect in reducing the number of medicines and this was primarily mediated through the brown bag review. The context of resource shortages and deep-seated views around medical decision-making influenced intervention implementation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Qualitative data on the implementation of the medication review and their wider views on their medicines was collected from older people with multimorbidity through semi-structured telephone interviews. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The SPPiRE trial was registered prospectively on the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN12752680).

Anticipatory care planning for community-dwelling older adults at risk of functional decline: a feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility, implementation and outcomes of an Anticipatory Care Planning (ACP) intervention in primary care to assist older adults at risk of functional decline by developing a personalized support plan. DESIGN: Feasibility cluster randomized control trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Eight primary care practices (four in Northern Ireland, United Kingdom and four in the Republic of Ireland) were randomly assigned to either intervention or control arm. Eligible patients were those identified in each practice as 70 years of age or older and assessed as at risk of functional decline. Study participants (intervention n = 34, control n = 31) and research staff were not blinded to group assignment. ANTICIPATORY CARE INTERVENTION: The intervention delivered by a registered nurse including: a) a home-based patient assessment; b) care planning on the basis of a holistic patient assessment, and c) documentation of a support plan. OUTCOME MEASURES: A conceptual framework (RE-AIM) guided the assessment on the potential impact of the ACP intervention on patient quality of life, mental health, healthcare utilisation, costs, perception of person-centred care, and reduction of potentially inappropriate prescribing. Data were collected at baseline and at 10 weeks and six months following delivery of the intervention. RESULTS: All pre-specified feasibility indicators were met. Patients were unanimous in the acceptance of the ACP intervention. Health care providers viewed the ACP intervention as feasible to implement in routine clinical practice with attending community supports. While there were no significant differences on the primary outcomes (EQ-5D-5L: -0.07 (-0.17, 0.04) p = .180; CES-D: 1.2 (-2.5, 4.8) p = .468) and most secondary measures, ancillary analysis on social support showed responsiveness to the intervention. Incremental cost analysis revealed a mean reduction in costs of €320 per patient (95% CI -31 to 25; p = 0.82) for intervention relative to the control. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully tested the ACP intervention in primary care settings and have shown that it is feasible to implement. The ACP intervention deserves further testing in a definitive trial to determine whether its implementation would lead to better outcomes or reduced costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT03902743 . Registered on 4 April 2019.

The "better data, better planning" census: a cross-sectional, multi-centre study investigating the factors influencing patient attendance at the emergency department in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Internationally Emergency Department (ED) crowding is a significant health services delivery issue posing a major risk to population health. ED crowding affects both the quality and access of health services and is associated with poorer patient outcomes and increased mortality rates. In Ireland the practising of "Corridor Medicine" and "Trolley Crises" have become prevalent. The objectives of this study are to describe the demographic and clinical profile of patients attending regional EDs and to investigate the factors influencing ED utilisation in Ireland. METHODS: This was a multi-centre, cross-sectional study and recruitment occurred at a selection of urban and rural EDs (n = 5) in Ireland throughout 2020. At each site all adults presenting over a 24 h census period were eligible for inclusion. Clinical data were collected via electronic records and a questionnaire provided information on demographics, healthcare utilisation, service awareness and factors influencing the decision to attend the ED. RESULTS: Demographics differed significantly between ED sites in terms of age (p ≤ 0.05), socioeconomic status (p ≤ 0.001), and proximity of health services (p ≤ 0.001). Prior to ED attendance 64% of participants accessed community health services. Most participants (70%) believed the ED was the "best place" for emergency care or attended due to lack of awareness of other services (30%). Musculoskeletal injuries were the most common reason for presentation to the ED in this study (24%) and almost a third of patients (31%) reported presenting to the ED for an x-ray or scan. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified regional and socioeconomic differences in the drivers of ED presentations and factors influencing ED attendance in Ireland from the patient perspective. Improved awareness of, and provision of alternative care pathways could potentially decrease ED attendances, which would be important in the context of reducing ED crowding during the COVID-19 pandemic. New strategies for integration of acute care in the community must acknowledge and plan for these issues as a universal approach is unlikely to be implemented successfully due to regional factors.

FUSARIUM-ID v.3.0: An Updated, Downloadable Resource for Fusarium Species Identification.

Species within Fusarium are of global agricultural, medical, and food/feed safety concern and have been extensively characterized. However, accurate identification of species is challenging and usually requires DNA sequence data. FUSARIUM-ID (http://isolate.fusariumdb.org/blast.php) is a publicly available database designed to support the identification of Fusarium species using sequences of multiple phylogenetically informative loci, especially the highly informative ∼680-bp 5' portion of the translation elongation factor 1-alpha (TEF1) gene that has been adopted as the primary barcoding locus in the genus. However, FUSARIUM-ID v.1.0 and 2.0 had several limitations, including inconsistent metadata annotation for the archived sequences and poor representation of some species complexes and marker loci. Here, we present FUSARIUM-ID v.3.0, which provides the following improvements: (i) additional and updated annotation of metadata for isolates associated with each sequence, (ii) expanded taxon representation in the TEF1 sequence database, (iii) availability of the sequence database as a downloadable file to enable local BLAST queries, and (iv) a tutorial file for users to perform local BLAST searches using either freely available software, such as SequenceServer, BLAST+ executable in the command line, and Galaxy, or the proprietary Geneious software. FUSARIUM-ID will be updated on a regular basis by archiving sequences of TEF1 and other loci from newly identified species and greater in-depth sampling of currently recognized species.

Interventions for improving outcomes in patients with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings.

BACKGROUND: Many people with chronic disease have more than one chronic condition, which is referred to as multimorbidity. The term comorbidity is also used but this is now taken to mean that there is a defined index condition with other linked conditions, for example diabetes and cardiovascular disease. It is also used when there are combinations of defined conditions that commonly co-exist, for example diabetes and depression. While this is not a new phenomenon, there is greater recognition of its impact and the importance of improving outcomes for individuals affected. Research in the area to date has focused mainly on descriptive epidemiology and impact assessment. There has been limited exploration of the effectiveness of interventions to improve outcomes for people with multimorbidity. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of health-service or patient-oriented interventions designed to improve outcomes in people with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings. Multimorbidity was defined as two or more chronic conditions in the same individual. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and seven other databases to 28 September 2015. We also searched grey literature and consulted experts in the field for completed or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised clinical trials (NRCTs), controlled before-after studies (CBAs), and interrupted time series analyses (ITS) evaluating interventions to improve outcomes for people with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings. Multimorbidity was defined as two or more chronic conditions in the same individual. This includes studies where participants can have combinations of any condition or have combinations of pre-specified common conditions (comorbidity), for example, hypertension and cardiovascular disease. The comparison was usual care as delivered in that setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies, evaluated study quality, and judged the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We conducted a meta-analysis of the results where possible and carried out a narrative synthesis for the remainder of the results. We present the results in a 'Summary of findings' table and tabular format to show effect sizes across all outcome types. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 17 RCTs examining a range of complex interventions for people with multimorbidity. Nine studies focused on defined comorbid conditions with an emphasis on depression, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The remaining studies focused on multimorbidity, generally in older people. In 11 studies, the predominant intervention element was a change to the organisation of care delivery, usually through case management or enhanced multidisciplinary team work. In six studies, the interventions were predominantly patient-oriented, for example, educational or self-management support-type interventions delivered directly to participants. Overall our confidence in the results regarding the effectiveness of interventions ranged from low to high certainty. There was little or no difference in clinical outcomes (based on moderate certainty evidence). Mental health outcomes improved (based on high certainty evidence) and there were modest reductions in mean depression scores for the comorbidity studies that targeted participants with depression (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.63 to -0.2). There was probably a small improvement in patient-reported outcomes (moderate certainty evidence). The intervention may make little or no difference to health service use (low certainty evidence), may slightly improve medication adherence (low certainty evidence), probably slightly improves patient-related health behaviours (moderate certainty evidence), and probably improves provider behaviour in terms of prescribing behaviour and quality of care (moderate certainty evidence). Cost data were limited. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review identifies the emerging evidence to support policy for the management of people with multimorbidity and common comorbidities in primary care and community settings. There are remaining uncertainties about the effectiveness of interventions for people with multimorbidity in general due to the relatively small number of RCTs conducted in this area to date, with mixed findings overall. It is possible that the findings may change with the inclusion of large ongoing well-organised trials in future updates. The results suggest an improvement in health outcomes if interventions can be targeted at risk factors such as depression in people with co-morbidity.

Successful implementation of a trans-jurisdictional, primary care, anticipatory care planning intervention for older adults at risk of functional decline: interviews with key health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Aging populations present a challenge to health systems internationally, due to the increasing complexity of care for older adults living with functional decline. This study aimed to elicit expert views of key health professionals on effective and sustainable implementation of a nurse-led, person-centred anticipatory care planning (ACP) intervention for older adults at risk of functional decline in a primary care setting. METHODS: We examined the feasibility of an ACP intervention in a trans-jurisdictional feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial consisting of home visits by research nurses who assessed participants' health, discussed their health goals and devised an anticipatory care plan following consultation with participants' GPs and adjunct clinical pharmacist. As part of the project, we elicited the views and recommendations of experienced key health professionals working with the target population who were recruited using a 'snowballing technique' in cooperation with older people health networks in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI), United Kingdom [n = 16: 7 ROI, 9 NI]. Following receipt of written information about the intervention and the provision of informed consent, the health professionals were interviewed to determine their expert views on the feasibility of the ACP intervention and recommendations for successful implementation. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The ACP intervention was perceived to be beneficial for most older patients with multimorbidity. Effective and sustainable implementation was said to be facilitated by accurate and timely patient selection, GP buy-in, use of existing structures within health systems, multidisciplinary and integrated working, ACP nurse training, as well as patient health literacy. Barriers emerged as significant work already undertaken, increasing workload, lack of time, funding and resources, fragmented services, and geographical inequalities. CONCLUSIONS: The key health professionals perceived the ACP intervention to be highly beneficial to patients, with significant potential to prevent or avoid functional decline and hospital admissions. They suggested that successful implementation of this primary care based, whole-person approach would involve integrated and multi-disciplinary working, GP buy in, patient health education, and ACP nurse training. The findings have potential implications for a full trial, and patient care and health policy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT03902743 . Registered on 4 April 2019.

Identifying Adherence Patterns Across Multiple Medications and Their Association With Health Outcomes in Older Community-Dwelling Adults With Multimorbidity.

OBJECTIVES: To classify older people with multimorbidity according to their adherence patterns and to examine the association between medication adherence and health outcomes. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a cohort study. Community-dwelling adults aged ≥70 years were recruited from 15 general practices in Ireland in 2010 (wave 1) and followed up 2 years later (wave 2). Participants had ≥2 RxRisk-V multimorbidity conditions at wave 1 and had ≥2 dispensations of RxRisk-V medications (wave 1-wave 2). Average adherence across RxRisk-V conditions was estimated based on continuous multiple-interval measure of medication availability (CMA7 function in AdhereR). Group-based trajectory models were used to group participants' adherence patterns for RxRisk-V medications. Multilevel regression was used to examine the association between adherence and (1) EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) utility (linear) and (2) vulnerability, using the Vulnerable Elders Survey (≥3 defined as vulnerable; logistic) at wave 2, controlling for potential confounders. RESULTS: Average adherence (CMA7) was 77% across 501 participants. Group-based trajectory models identified 5 adherence groups: (1) initial low adherers, gradual increase; (2) high adherers, sharp decline; (3) steady adherers, gradual decline; (4) consistent high adherers; and (5) consistent nonadherers. Higher average adherence was associated with a significant increase in EQ-5D utility (adjusted ß = 0.11, robust standard error 0.04). Group 5 was associated with significantly increased vulnerability compared to group 4 (adjusted odds ratio = 1.88; 95% confidence interval 1.01-3.50). CONCLUSION: Increased average adherence was associated with higher EQ-5D utility. Adherence grouping did not significantly impact utility. Suboptimal adherence to multiple medications in older adults with multimorbidity was associated with vulnerability.

Quantifying test-retest variability of natural and suppressed citric acid cough thresholds and urge to cough ratings.

INTRODUCTION: The citric acid cough reflex test (CRT) is used to quantify cough sensitivity and evaluate the effects of cough therapies and antitussive medications. This study quantifies the test-retest variability of natural and suppressed citric acid cough thresholds and urge to cough ratings in healthy individuals. METHODS: Healthy adults (n = 16) inhaled increasing concentrations of citric acid (0.01-3.2 mol/L) on three alternate days (1, 3, 5) until C2 cough thresholds (i.e. two consecutive coughs within 3 s) or the highest concentrations of citric acid was reached. Participants were instructed to "cough if you need to" in the natural cough condition, and "try not to cough" in the suppressed cough condition. Following each inhalation, participants were asked to rate their urge to cough (UTC) using a modified Borg Scale. RESULTS: Natural cough thresholds (NCTs) increased across days 1-3 (0.87 doubling concentrations, 95% CI, 0.28, 1.44, p = 0.004) and 1-5 (0.87 doubling concentrations, 95% CI, 0.33, 1.41, p = 0.004). Suppressed cough thresholds (SCTs) increased across days 1-5 (0.64 doubling concentrations per day, 95% CI, 0.03, 1.22, p = 0.04). After taking the effect of day into account, NCTs and SCTs varied within-participants by 0.75 (95% CI, 0.53, 0.93) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.55,0.98) doubling concentrations respectively. UTC ratings at NCT, or SCT did not significantly increase across days 1-3 or 1-5. Sub-threshold (0.05 mol/L) UTC ratings increased across days 1-3 (-1.43 ratings per day, 95% CI, -2.31, -0.5, p = 0.005) and 1-5 (-1.71 ratings per day, 95% CI, -2.59, -0.79, p = 0.001). UTC ratings at NCT, SCT, and sub-threshold varied within-participants after taking into account the effect of day by 1.34 (95% CI, 1.03, 1.71), 1.47 (95% CI, 1.10, 1.91) and 1.20 (95% CI, 0.91, 1.50) ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Natural and suppressed cough thresholds and UTC ratings are subject to test-retest variability. These data are important for the use of citric acid CRT as an outcome measure in longitudinal cough research, as they facilitate interpretation of whether changes in citric acid cough thresholds across days reflect true changes in cough sensitivity, rather than an artefact of repeating the test.

A systematic review of methods of citric acid cough reflex testing.

INTRODUCTION: This systematic review summarises and appraises methods of citric acid cough reflex testing (CRT) documented in published literature. METHODS: Electronic databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Scopus were searched up to and including 11th February 2018. Studies reporting a method of citric acid CRT, published in peer-reviewed journals in English or Spanish, were assessed for the inclusion criteria. Of the selected studies, information on the instrumentation and CRT protocol was extracted. RESULTS: A total of 129 studies were included. Instrumentation and protocols differed widely across studies. Reporting of methods of citric acid CRT was sub-standard, with many crucial methodological components omitted from published manuscripts, preventing their full replication. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable methodological variability exists for citric acid CRT in published literature. The findings suggest that caution is warranted in comparing citric acid cough thresholds across studies. Full replication of previously published methods of citric acid CRT is limited due to crucial elements of the citric acid CRT protocol being omitted from published manuscripts. These findings have implications on the use of citric acid CRT in clinical and pharmaceutical studies to evaluate the effects of antitussive medications and cough therapies.