Care transitions: a leverage point for safe and effective medication use in older adults--a mini-review.

Older adults often face challenges as they transition out of the acute care hospital, especially with regard to adhering to their medications. In this narrative review, we discuss medication adherence in older adults across the continuum of care, describing reasons for nonadherence, methods to assess adherence and tools to improve adherence, with particular focus on emerging techniques and technologies. Taking steps at care transitions to assess medications and foster adherence to the medication regimen can increase the safety of older adults following hospitalization.

Health Literacy-Informed Communication to Reduce Discharge Medication Errors in Hospitalized Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Inadequate communication between caregivers and clinicians at hospital discharge contributes to medication dosing errors in children. Health literacy-informed communication strategies during medication counseling can reduce dosing errors but have not been tested in the pediatric hospital setting. Objective: To test a health literacy-informed communication intervention to decrease liquid medication dosing errors compared with standard counseling in hospitalized children. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, randomized clinical trial was performed from June 22, 2021, to August 20, 2022, at a tertiary care, US children's hospital. English- and Spanish-speaking caregivers of hospitalized children 6 years or younger prescribed a new, scheduled liquid medication at discharge were included in the analysis. Interventions: Permuted block (n = 4) randomization (1:1) to a health literacy-informed discharge medication communication bundle (n = 99) compared with standard counseling (n = 99). A study team member delivered the intervention consisting of a written, pictogram-based medication instruction sheet, teach back (caregivers state information taught), and demonstration of dosing with show back (caregivers show how they would draw the liquid medication in the syringe). Main Outcome and Measures: Observed dosing errors, assessed using a caregiver-submitted photograph of their child's medication-filled syringe and expressed as the percentage difference from the prescribed dose. Secondary outcomes included caregiver-reported medication knowledge. Outcome measurements were blinded to participant group assignment. Results: Among 198 caregivers randomized (mean [SD] age, 31.4 [6.5] years; 186 women [93.9%]; 36 [18.2%] Hispanic or Latino and 158 [79.8%] White), the primary outcome was available for 151 (76.3%). The observed mean (SD) percentage dosing error was 1.0% (2.2 percentage points) among the intervention group and 3.3% (5.1 percentage points) among the standard counseling group (absolute difference, 2.3 [95% CI, 1.0-3.6] percentage points; P < .001). Twenty-four of 79 caregivers in the intervention group (30.4%) measured an incorrect dose compared with 39 of 72 (54.2%) in the standard counseling group (P = .003). The intervention enhanced caregiver-reported medication knowledge compared with the standard counseling group for medication dose (71 of 76 [93.4%] vs 55 of 69 [79.7%]; P = .03), duration of administration (65 of 76 [85.5%] vs 49 of 69 [71.0%]; P = .04), and correct reporting of 2 or more medication adverse effects (60 of 76 [78.9%] vs 13 of 69 [18.8%]; P < .001). There were no differences in knowledge of medication name, indication, frequency, or storage. Conclusions and Relevance: A health literacy-informed discharge medication communication bundle reduced home liquid medication administration errors and enhanced caregiver medication knowledge compared with standard counseling. Routine use of these standardized strategies can promote patient safety following hospital discharge. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05143047.

Challenges in Deprescribing among Older Adults in Post-Acute Care Transitions to Home.

OBJECTIVES: Medications with a higher risk of harm or that are unlikely to be beneficial are used by nearly all older patients in home health care (HHC). The objective of this study was to understand stakeholders' perspectives on challenges in deprescribing these medications for post-acute HHC patients. DESIGN: Qualitative individual interviews were conducted with stakeholders involved with post-acute deprescribing. SETTING AND PARTICIPANT: Older HHC patients, HHC nurses, pharmacists, and primary/acute care/post-acute prescribers from 9 US states participated in individual qualitative interviews. MEASURES: Interview questions were focused on the experience, processes, roles, training, workflow, and challenges of deprescribing in hospital-to-home transitions. We used the constant comparison approach to identify and compare findings among patient, prescriber, and pharmacist and HHC nurse stakeholders. RESULTS: We interviewed 9 older patients, 11 HHC nurses, 5 primary care physicians (PCP), 3 pharmacists, 1 hospitalist, and 1 post-acute nurse practitioner. Four challenges were described in post-acute deprescribing for HHC patients. First, PCPs' time constraints, the timing of patient encounters after hospital discharge, and the lack of prioritization of deprescribing make it difficult for PCPs to initiate post-acute deprescribing. Second, patients are often confused about their medications, despite the care team's efforts in educating the patients. Third, communication is challenging between HHC nurses, PCPs, specialists, and hospitalists. Fourth, the roles of HHC nurses and pharmacists are limited in care team collaboration and discussion about post-acute deprescribing. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Post-acute deprescribing relies on multiple parties in the care team yet it has challenges. Interventions to align the timing of deprescribing and that of post-acute care visits, prioritize deprescribing and allow clinicians more time to complete related tasks, improve medication education for patients, and ensure effective communication in the care team with synchronized electronic health record systems are needed to advance deprescribing during the transition from hospital to home.

Deprescribing medications among patients with multiple prescribers: A socioecological model.

Deprescribing is the intentional dose reduction or discontinuation of a medication. The development of deprescribing interventions should take into consideration important organizational, interprofessional, and patient-specific barriers that can be further complicated by the presence of multiple prescribers involved in a patient's care. Patients who receive care from an increasing number of prescribers may experience disruptions in the timely transfer of relevant healthcare information, increasing the risk of exposure to drug-drug interactions and other medication-related problems. Furthermore, the fragmentation of healthcare information across health systems can contribute to the refilling of discontinued medications, reducing the effectiveness of deprescribing interventions. Thus, deprescribing interventions must carefully consider the unique characteristics of patients and their prescribers to ensure interventions are successfully implemented. In this special article, an international working group of physicians, pharmacists, nurses, epidemiologists, and researchers from the United States Deprescribing Research Network (USDeN) developed a socioecological model to understand how multiple prescribers may influence the implementation of a deprescribing intervention at the individual, interpersonal, organizational, and societal level. This manuscript also includes a description of the concept of multiple prescribers and outlines a research agenda for future investigations to consider. The information contained in this manuscript should be used as a framework for future deprescribing interventions to carefully consider how multiple prescribers can influence the successful implementation of the service and ensure the intervention is as effective as possible.

Caregiver and Clinician Perspectives on Discharge Medication Counseling: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Children are at increased risk for medication errors and the transition from hospital-to-home is a vulnerable time for errors to occur. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of multidisciplinary clinicians and caregivers regarding discharge medication counseling and to develop a conceptual model to inform intervention efforts to reduce discharge medication dosing errors. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with clinicians and caregivers of children <4 years old discharged from the hospital on a liquid medication. A hierarchical coding system was developed using the interview guide and several transcripts. Qualitative analysis employed an iterative inductive-deductive approach to identify domains and subthemes and inform a conceptual framework. RESULTS: We conducted focus groups and individual interviews with 17 caregivers and 16 clinicians. Using the Donabedian structure-process-outcomes model of quality evaluation, domains and subthemes included: (1) infrastructure of healthcare delivery, including supplies for counseling, content and organization of discharge instructions, clinician training and education, roles and responsibilities of team members, and hospital pharmacy delivery and counseling program; (2) processes of healthcare delivery, including medication reconciliation, counseling content, counseling techniques, and language barriers and health literacy; and (3) measurable outcomes, including medication dosing accuracy and caregiver understanding and adherence to discharge instructions. CONCLUSIONS: The conceptual model resulting from this analysis can be applied to the development and evaluation of interventions to reduce discharge medication dosing errors following a hospitalization. Interventions should use a health literacy universal precautions approach-written materials with plain language and pictures and verbal counseling with teach-back and show-back.

Deprescribing Medications Among Older Adults From End of Hospitalization Through Postacute Care: A Shed-MEDS Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Deprescribing is a promising approach to addressing the burden of polypharmacy. Few studies have initiated comprehensive deprescribing in the hospital setting among older patients requiring ongoing care in a postacute care (PAC) facility. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of a patient-centered deprescribing intervention among hospitalized older adults transitioning or being discharged to a PAC facility. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial of the Shed-MEDS (Best Possible Medication History, Evaluate, Deprescribing Recommendations, and Synthesis) deprescribing intervention was conducted between March 2016 and October 2020. Patients who were admitted to an academic medical center and discharged to 1 of 22 PAC facilities affiliated with the medical center were recruited. Patients who were 50 years or older and had 5 or more prehospital medications were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to the intervention group or control group. Patients who were non-English speaking, were unhoused, were long-stay residents of nursing homes, or had less than 6 months of life expectancy were excluded. An intention-to-treat approach was used. Interventions: The intervention group received the Shed-MEDS intervention, which consisted of a pharmacist- or nurse practitioner-led comprehensive medication review, patient or surrogate-approved deprescribing recommendations, and deprescribing actions that were initiated in the hospital and continued throughout the PAC facility stay. The control group received usual care at the hospital and PAC facility. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the total medication count at hospital discharge and PAC facility discharge, with follow-up assessments during the 90-day period after PAC facility discharge. Secondary outcomes included the total number of potentially inappropriate medications at each time point, the Drug Burden Index, and adverse events. Results: A total of 372 participants (mean [SD] age, 76.2 [10.7] years; 229 females [62%]) were randomized to the intervention or control groups. Of these participants, 284 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (142 in the intervention group and 142 in the control group). Overall, there was a statistically significant treatment effect, with patients in the intervention group taking a mean of 14% fewer medications at PAC facility discharge (mean ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.93; P < .001) and 15% fewer medications at the 90-day follow-up (mean ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.92; P < .001) compared with the control group. The intervention additionally reduced patient exposure to potentially inappropriate medications and Drug Burden Index. Adverse drug event rates were similar between the intervention and control groups (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.52-1.30). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this trial showed that the Shed-MEDS patient-centered deprescribing intervention was safe and effective in reducing the total medication burden at PAC facility discharge and 90 days after discharge. Future studies are needed to examine the effect of this intervention on patient-reported and long-term clinical outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02979353.

How to Deprescribe Potentially Inappropriate Medications During the Hospital-to-Home Transition: Stakeholder Perspectives on Essential Tasks.

PURPOSE: Nearly all older patients receiving postacute home health care (HHC) use potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) that carry a risk of harm. Deprescribing can reduce and optimize the use of PIMs, yet it is often not conducted among HHC patients. The objective of this study was to gather perspectives from patient, practitioner, and HHC clinician stakeholders on tasks that are essential to postacute deprescribing in HHC. METHODS: A total of 44 stakeholders, including 14 HHC patients, 15 practitioners (including 9 primary care physicians, 4 pharmacists, 1 hospitalist, and 1 nurse practitioner), and 15 HHC nurses, participated. The stakeholders were from 12 US states, including New York (n = 29), Colorado (n = 2), Connecticut (n = 1), Illinois (n = 2), Kansas (n = 2), Massachusetts (n = 1), Minnesota (n = 1), Mississippi (n = 1), Nebraska (n = 1), Ohio (n = 1), Tennessee (n = 1), and Texas (n = 2). First, individual interviews were conducted by experienced research staff via video conference or telephone. Second, the study team reviewed all interview transcripts and selected interview statements regarding stakeholders' suggestions for important tasks needed for postacute deprescribing in HHC. Third, concept mapping was conducted in which stakeholders sorted and rated selected interview statements regarding importance and feasibility. A content analysis was conducted of data collected in the individual interviews, and a mixed-method analysis was conducted of data collected in the concept mapping. FINDINGS: Four essential tasks were identified for postacute deprescribing in HHC: (1) ongoing review and assessment of medication use, (2) patent-centered and individualized plan of deprescribing, (3) timely and efficient communication among members of the care team, and (4) continuous and tailored medication education to meet patient needs. Among these tasks, developing patient-centered deprescribing considerations was considered the most important and feasible, followed by medication education, review and assessment of medication use, and communication. IMPLICATIONS: Deprescribing during the transition of care from hospital to home requires the following: continuous medication education for patients, families, and caregivers; ongoing review and assessment of medication use; patient-centered deprescribing considerations; and effective communication and collaboration among the primary care physician, HHC nurse, and pharmacist.

Model-Guided Decision-Making for Thromboprophylaxis and Hospital-Acquired Thromboembolic Events Among Hospitalized Children and Adolescents: The CLOT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Rates of hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (HA-VTE) are increasing among pediatric patients. Identifying at-risk patients for whom prophylactic interventions should be considered remains challenging. Objective: To determine whether use of a previously validated HA-VTE prognostic model, together with pediatric hematologist review, could reduce pediatric inpatient rates of HA-VTE. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic randomized clinical trial was performed from November 2, 2020, through January 31, 2022, at a single-center academic children's hospital (Monroe Carell Jr Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt). All pediatric hospital admissions (aged <22 years) under inpatient status were included and randomized. Intervention: All patients had an HA-VTE probability automatically calculated daily, which was visible to the hematology research team for patients in the intervention group. Patients with an elevated risk (predicted probability ≥2.5%) underwent additional medical record review by the research team to determine eligibility for thromboprophylaxis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was rate of HA-VTE. Secondary outcomes included rates of prophylactic anticoagulation and anticoagulation-associated bleeding events. Results: A total of 17 427 hospitalizations met eligibility criteria, were randomized, and were included in the primary analysis: patients had a median (IQR) age of 1.7 (0 to 11.1) years; there were 9143 (52.5%) female patients and 8284 (47.5%) male patients, and there were 445 (2.6%) Asian patients, 2739 (15.9%) Black patients, and 11 752 (67.4%) White patients. The 2 groups were evenly balanced in number (8717 in the intervention group and 8710 in the control group) and patient characteristics. A total of 58 patients (0.7%) in the control group and 77 (0.9%) in the intervention group developed HA-VTE (risk difference: 2.2 per 1000 patients; 95% CI, -0.4 to 4.8 per 1000 patients; P = .10). Recommendations to initiate thromboprophylaxis were accepted by primary clinical teams 25.8% of the time (74 of 287 hospitalizations). Minor bleeding events were rare among patients who received anticoagulation (3 of 74 [4.1%]), and no major bleeding events were observed during the study period. Among patients randomized to the control group, the model exhibited high discrimination accuracy (C statistic, 0.799, 95% CI, 0.725 to 0.856). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of the use of a HA-VTE prognostic model to reduce pediatric inpatient rates of HA-VTE, despite the use of an accurate and validated prognostic model for HA-VTE, there was substantial reluctance by primary clinical teams to initiate thromboprophylaxis as recommended. In this context, rates of HA-VTE between the control and intervention groups were not different. Future research is needed to identify improved strategies for prevention of HA-VTE and to overcome clinician concerns regarding thromboprophylaxis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04574895.

How "age-friendly" are deprescribing interventions? A scoping review of deprescribing trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how age-friendly deprescribing trials are regarding intervention design and outcome assessment. Reduced use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) can be addressed by deprescribing-a systematic process of discontinuing and/or reducing the use of PIMs. The 4Ms-"Medication", "Mentation", "Mobility", and "What Matters Most" to the person-can be used to guide assessment of age-friendliness of deprescribing trials. DATA SOURCE: Published literature. STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA EXTRACTION METHODS: The literature was identified using keywords related to deprescribing and polypharmacy in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ProQuest, CINAHL, and Cochrane and snowballing. Study characteristics were extracted and evaluated for consideration of 4Ms. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Thirty-seven of the 564 trials identified met the review eligibility criteria. Intervention design: "Medication" was considered in the intervention design of all trials; "Mentation" was considered in eight trials; "Mobility" (n = 2) and "What Matters Most" (n = 6) were less often considered in the design of intervention. Most trials targeted providers without specifying how matters important to older adults and their families were aligned with deprescribing decisions. OUTCOME ASSESSMENT: "Medication" was the most commonly assessed outcome (n = 33), followed by "Mobility" (n = 13) and "Mentation" (n = 10) outcomes, with no study examining "What Matters Most" outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: "Mentation" and "Mobility", and "What Matters Most" have been considered to varying degrees in deprescribing trials, limiting the potential of deprescribing evidence to contribute to improved clinical practice in building an age-friendly health care system.

What works in medication reconciliation: an on-treatment and site analysis of the MARQUIS2 study.

BACKGROUND: The second Multicenter Medication Reconciliation Quality Improvement Study demonstrated a marked reduction in medication discrepancies per patient. The aim of the current analysis was to determine the association of patient exposure to each system-level intervention and receipt of each patient-level intervention on these results. METHODS: This study was conducted at 17 North American Hospitals, the study period was 18 months per site, and sites typically adopted interventions after 2-5 months of preintervention data collection. We conducted an on-treatment analysis (ie, an evaluation of outcomes based on patient exposure) of system-level interventions, both at the category level and at the individual component level, based on monthly surveys of implementation site leads at each site (response rate 65%). We then conducted a similar analysis of patient-level interventions, as determined by study pharmacist review of documented activities in the medical record. We analysed the association of each intervention on the adjusted number of medication discrepancies per patient in admission and discharge orders, based on a random sample of up to 22 patients per month per site, using mixed-effects Poisson regression with hospital site as a random effect. We then used a generalised linear mixed-effects model (GLMM) decision tree to determine which patient-level interventions explained the most variance in discrepancy rates. RESULTS: Among 4947 patients, patient exposure to seven of the eight system-level component categories was associated with modest but significant reductions in discrepancy rates (adjusted rate ratios (ARR) 0.75-0.97), as were 15 of the 17 individual system-level intervention components, including hiring, reallocating and training personnel to take a best possible medication history (BPMH) and training personnel to perform discharge medication reconciliation and patient counselling. Receipt of five of seven patient-level interventions was independently associated with large reductions in discrepancy rates, including receipt of a BPMH in the emergency department (ED) by a trained clinician (ARR 0.40, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.43), admission medication reconciliation by a trained clinician (ARR 0.57, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.64) and discharge medication reconciliation by a trained clinician (ARR 0.64, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.73). In GLMM decision tree analyses, patients who received both a BPMH in the ED and discharge medication reconciliation by a trained clinician experienced the lowest discrepancy rates (0.08 per medication per patient). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Patient-level interventions most associated with reductions in discrepancies were receipt of a BPMH of admitted patients in the ED and admission and discharge medication reconciliation by a trained clinician. System-level interventions were associated with modest reduction in discrepancies for the average patient but are likely important to support patient-level interventions and may reach more patients. These findings can be used to help hospitals and health systems prioritise interventions to improve medication safety during care transitions.

Pragmatic evaluation of events and benefits of lipid lowering in older adults (PREVENTABLE): Trial design and rationale.

Whether initiation of statins could increase survival free of dementia and disability in adults aged ≥75 years is unknown. PREVENTABLE, a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized pragmatic clinical trial, will compare high-intensity statin therapy (atorvastatin 40 mg) with placebo in 20,000 community-dwelling adults aged ≥75 years without cardiovascular disease, disability, or dementia at baseline. Exclusion criteria include statin use in the prior year or for >5 years and inability to take a statin. Potential participants are identified using computable phenotypes derived from the electronic health record and local referrals from the community. Participants will undergo baseline cognitive testing, with physical testing and a blinded lipid panel if feasible. Cognitive testing and disability screening will be conducted annually. Multiple data sources will be queried for cardiovascular events, dementia, and disability; survival is site-reported and supplemented by a National Death Index search. The primary outcome is survival free of new dementia or persisting disability. Co-secondary outcomes are a composite of cardiovascular death, hospitalization for unstable angina or myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or coronary revascularization; and a composite of mild cognitive impairment or dementia. Ancillary studies will offer mechanistic insights into the effects of statins on key outcomes. Biorepository samples are obtained and stored for future study. These results will inform the benefit of statins for increasing survival free of dementia and disability among older adults. This is a pioneering pragmatic study testing important questions with low participant burden to align with the needs of the growing population of older adults.

Improving Medication Reconciliation with Comprehensive Evaluation at a Veterans Affairs Skilled Nursing Facility.

BACKGROUND: Unintentional medication discrepancies due to inadequate medication reconciliation pose a threat to patient safety. Skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) are an important care setting where patients are vulnerable to unintentional medication discrepancies due to increased medical complexity and care transitions. This study describes a quality improvement (QI) approach to improve medication reconciliation in an SNF setting as part of the Multi-Center Medication Reconciliation Quality Improvement Study 2 (MARQUIS2). METHODS: This study was conducted at a 112-bed US Department of Veterans Affairs SNF. The researchers used several QI methods, including data benchmarking, stakeholder surveys, process mapping, and a Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA) to complete comprehensive baseline assessments. RESULTS: Baseline assessments revealed that medication reconciliation processes were error-prone, with high rates of medication discrepancies. Provider surveys and process mapping revealed extremely labor-intensive and highly complex processes lacking standardization. Factors contributing were polypharmacy, limited resources, electronic health record limitations, and patient exposure to multiple care transitions. HFMEA enabled a methodical approach to identify and address challenges. The team validated the best possible medication history (BPMH) process for hospital settings as outlined by MARQUIS2 for the SNF setting and found it necessary to use additional medication lists to account for multiple care transitions. CONCLUSION: SNFs represent a critical setting for medication reconciliation efforts due to challenges completing the reconciliation process and the concomitant high risk of adverse drug events in this population. Initial baseline assessments effectively identified existing problems and can be used to guide targeted interventions.