Supporting appropriate use of extended dual antiplatelet therapy post-myocardial infarction based on an innovative 12-month ticagrelor virtual service.

Purpose: Extended dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with ticagrelor and aspirin is recommended in selected cases after myocardial infarction (MI) but not widely deployed in practice. This study assessed an innovative, cardiology pharmacist-led virtual service for determining eligibility for extended DAPT among patients completing 12 months of initial DAPT in primary care following MI. Methods: Within this model, potentially eligible individuals are reviewed virtually by a cardiology pharmacist for suitability for extended DAPT with reduced-dose ticagrelor [60 mg twice daily (BD)] for up to 3 years. Eligibility is guided by the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial criteria (aged ≥50 years and having ≥1 high-risk feature for further ischaemic events). This is balanced against potential ineligibility driven primarily by bleeding risk, assessed using PRECISE-DAPT score. The final recommendation is sent to primary care to action. The present work is a retrospective evaluation of patients referred to the service between July 2018 and December 2021. Results: A total of 200 patients were included [n = 131 (65.5%) male; mean age: 69.4 ± 9.5 years]. Of these, 79 (39.5%) were recommended for extended DAPT based on the balance of risks for further ischaemic events vs. bleeding. Sixty-three patients on high-dose DAPT (ticagrelor 90 mg BD)-which is inappropriate beyond 12 months-were reassigned to reduced-dose DAPT or aspirin monotherapy. Conclusions: This virtual clinic played a key role in medicines optimisation, enabling appropriate patients to benefit from extended DAPT while offsetting bleeding risk. The model could be adapted locally for use elsewhere.

The Australian Team Approach to Polypharmacy Evaluation and Reduction (AusTAPER) hospital study: effect of a collaborative medication review on the number of current regular medicines for older hospital inpatients.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Potentially harmful polypharmacy is a growing public health concern. This article aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a structured Team Approach to Polypharmacy Evaluation and Reduction (AusTAPER) framework. METHODS: We recruited patients at metropolitan hospitals for a randomised controlled trial with 12 months of follow-up. The intervention included a comprehensive medicines history, multidisciplinary meeting and medicines review prior to discharge, with engagement with the participants' general practitioner extending after discharge. The primary outcome was the change in the number of regular medicines used at 12 months from baseline. A cost consequence was performed to estimate costs per participant during the study period. RESULTS: There were 98 participants enrolled in the study. The number of regular medicines was significantly reduced from baseline in both groups (-1.7 ± 4.3, t = 2.38, P = 0.02 in the control group vs -2.7 ± 3.6, t = 4.48, P = 0.0001 in the intervention group), although there was no statistical difference detected between the two groups (1.0 (SE 0.9), t = 1.03, P = 0.31). The intervention was estimated to cost AU$644.17 and was associated with cost savings of AU$552.53 per participant in sustained reduced medicines cost. Health outcomes and healthcare costs were similar in both groups. DISCUSSION: Medicines were significantly reduced in both groups, with a trend to a larger reduction in medicines at 12 months in the intervention group. The intervention cost was approximately offset by sustained reduced medicines cost, although these results should be regarded cautiously because of the absence of significance in the differences in outcomes between groups.

The Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland quality improvement project and integrated chronic kidney disease system: implementation within a primary care network.

BACKGROUND: The optimisation of patients in primary care is a prime opportunity to manage patient care within the community and reduce the burden of referrals on secondary care. This paper presents a quality improvement clinical programme taking place within an NHS Primary Care Network as part of the wider Leicester Leicestershire Rutland integrated chronic kidney disease programme. METHOD: Patients are optimised to guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, by a primary care clinical team who are supported by nephrology consultants and nephrology pharmacists. Multidisciplinary team meetings take place with secondary care specialists and primary care staff. Learning is passed to the community clinicians for better patient treatment locally. RESULTS: A total of 526 patients were reviewed under this project.The total number of referrals to secondary care which were discharged following first outpatient appointment, reduced from 42.9% to 10%. This reduction of 32.9% represents the optimisation of patient cases through this quality improvement project. Patients can be optimised and managed within the community, reducing the number of unnecessary referrals to secondary care. CONCLUSION: This programme has the potential to offer significant improvement in patient outcomes when expanded to a larger patient base. Medicine management and the use of clinical staff are optimised in both primary and secondary care.

Collaborative discussions between GPs and pharmacists to optimise patient medication: a qualitative study within a UK primary care clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: There has been significant investment in pharmacists working in UK general practice to improve the effective and safe use of medicines. However, evidence of how to optimise collaboration between GPs and pharmacists in the context of polypharmacy (multiple medication) is lacking. AIM: To explore GP and pharmacist views and experiences of in-person, interprofessional collaborative discussions (IPCDs) as part of a complex intervention to optimise medication use for patients with polypharmacy in general practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: A mixed-method process evaluation embedded within the Improving Medicines use in People with Polypharmacy in Primary Care (IMPPP) trial conducted in Bristol and the West Midlands, between February 2021 and September 2023. METHOD: Audio-recordings of IPCDs between GPs and pharmacists, along with individual semi-structured interviews to explore their reflections on these discussions, were used. All recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: A total of 14 practices took part in the process evaluation from February 2022 to September 2023; 17 IPCD meetings were audio-recorded, discussing 30 patients (range 1-6 patients per meeting). In all, six GPs and 13 pharmacists were interviewed. The IPCD was highly valued by GPs and pharmacists who described benefits, including: strengthening their working relationship; gaining in confidence to manage more complex patients; and learning from each other. It was often challenging, however, to find time for the IPCDs. CONCLUSION: The model of IPCD used in this study provided protected time for GPs and pharmacists to work together to deliver whole-patient care, with both professions finding this beneficial. Protected time for interprofessional liaison and collaboration, and structured interventions may facilitate improved patient care.

A quantitative study on the impact of a community falls pharmacist role, on medicines optimisation in older people at risk of falls.

BACKGROUND: The World Falls guidance includes medication review as part of its recommended multifactorial risk assessment for those at high risk of falling. Use of Falls Risk Increasing Drugs (FRIDs) along with polypharmacy and anticholinergic burden (ACB) are known to increase the risk of falls in older people. METHOD: The impact of a community falls pharmacist within a hospital Trust, working as part of a multi-professional community falls prevention service, was evaluated in 92 people aged 65 years or older, by analysing data before and after pharmacist review, namely: number and type of FRIDs prescribed; anticholinergic burden score using ACBcalc®; appropriateness of medicines prescribed; bone health review using an approved too; significance of clinical intervention; cost avoidance, drug cost savings and environmental impact. RESULTS: Following pharmacist review, there was a reduction in polypharmacy (mean number of medicines prescribed per patient reduced by 8%; p < 0.05) and anticholinergic burden score (average score per patient reduced by 33%; p < 0.05). Medicines appropriateness improved (Medicines Appropriateness Index score decreased by 56%; p < 0.05). There were 317 clinically significant interventions by the community falls pharmacist. One hundred and one FRIDs were deprescribed. Annual cost avoidance and drug cost savings were £40,689-£82,642 and avoidable carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from reducing inappropriate prescribing amounted to 941 kg CO2. CONCLUSION: The community falls pharmacist role increases prescribing appropriateness in the older population at risk of falls, and is an effective and cost-efficient means to optimise medicines in this population, as well as having a positive impact on the environment.

'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.

Person-centred medicine in the care home setting: development of a complex intervention.

BACKGROUND: Person-centred medicine is recommended in the care of older patients. Yet, involvement of care home residents and relatives in medication processes remains limited in routine care. Therefore, we aimed to develop a complex intervention focusing on resident and relative involvement and interprofessional communication to support person-centred medicine in the care home setting. METHODS: The development took place from October 2021 to March 2022 in the Municipality of Aarhus, Denmark. The study followed the Medical Research Council guidance on complex intervention development using a combination of theoretical, evidence-based, and partnership approaches. The patient involvement tool, the PREparation of Patients for Active Involvement in medication Review (PREPAIR), was included in a preliminary intervention model. Study activities included developing programme theory, engaging stakeholders, and exploring key uncertainties through interviews, co-producing workshops, and testing with end-users to develop the intervention and an implementation strategy. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Interprofessional Shared Decision Making Model were used. Data were analysed using a rapid analysis approach. RESULTS: Before the workshops, six residents and four relatives were interviewed. Based on their feedback, PREPAIR was modified to the PREPAIR care home to fit the care home population. In total, ten persons participated in the co-producing workshops, including health care professionals and municipal managerial and quality improvement staff. The developed intervention prototype was tested for three residents and subsequently refined to the final intervention, including two fixed components (PREPAIR care home and an interprofessional medication communication template) delivered in a flexible three-stage workflow. Additionally, a multi-component implementation strategy was formed. In line with the developed programme theory, the intervention supported health care professionals´ awareness about resident and relative involvement. It provided a structure for involvement, empowered the residents to speak, and brought new insights through dialogue, thereby supporting involvement in medication-related decisions. The final intervention was perceived to be relevant, acceptable, and feasible in the care home setting. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the final intervention may be a viable approach to facilitate person-centred medicine through resident and relative involvement. This will be further explored in a planned feasibility study.

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.

Prescribing and deprescribing in older people with life-limiting illnesses receiving hospice care at the end of life: A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although prescribing and deprescribing practices in older people have been the subject of much research generally, there are limited data in older people at the end of life. This highlights the need for research to determine prescribing and deprescribing patterns, as a first step to facilitate guideline development for medicines optimisation in this vulnerable population. AIMS: To examine prescribing and deprescribing patterns in older people at the end of life and to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use. DESIGN: A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study where medical records of eligible participants were reviewed, and data extracted. Medication appropriateness was assessed using two sets of consensus-based criteria; the STOPPFrail criteria and criteria developed by Morin et al. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Decedents aged 65 years and older admitted continuously for at least 14 days before death to three inpatient hospice units across Northern Ireland, who died between 1st January and 31st December 2018, and who had a known diagnosis, known cause of death and prescription data. Unexpected/sudden deaths were excluded. RESULTS: Polypharmacy was reported to be continued until death in 96.2% of 106 decedents (mean age of 75.6 years). Most patients received at least one potentially inappropriate medication at the end of life according to the STOPPFrail and the criteria developed by Morin et al. (57.5 and 69.8% respectively). Limited prevalence of proactive deprescribing interventions was observed. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of systematic rationalisation of drug treatments, a substantial proportion of older patients continued to receive potentially inappropriate medication until death.

Scope, content and quality of clinical pharmacy practice guidelines: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for pharmacy practitioners regarding various clinical pharmacy activities have been published in a number of countries. There is a need to review the guidelines and identify the scope of activities covered as a prelude to developing internationally acceptable common guidelines. AIM: To review the scope of clinical pharmacy guidelines and assess the extent to which these guidelines conform to quality standards as per the AGREE II instrument. METHOD: Medline, Embase, Guideline Central, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Google Scholar and Google (for grey literature) were searched for the period 2010 to January 2023. Guidelines which focused on any health care setting and any clinical pharmacy activity were included. Data were extracted and quality assessed independently by two reviewers using the English version of the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: Thirty-eight guidelines were included, mostly originating from Australia (n = 10), Ireland (n = 8), UK (n = 7) and USA (n = 5). Areas covered included medication reconciliation, medicines optimisation, medication management and transition of care. As per the AGREE II assessment, the highest score was obtained for the scope and purpose domain and the lowest score for rigour of development, mainly due to non-consideration of literature/evidence to inform guideline development. CONCLUSION: Clinical pharmacy guidelines development processes need to focus on all quality domains and should take a systematic approach to guideline development. Guidelines need to further emphasise person-centred care and clinical communication. There is a scope to harmonise the guidelines internationally considering the diverse practices, standards and legislations across different geographies.

Medicines and other factors causing deaths in English and welsh care homes: five-years of preventing future death reports by coroners.

BACKGROUND: Whilst information has been published on the impact, severity and causes of incidents involving medicines in care homes, it has not been systematically described. This review explored whether coroners' Preventing Future Death (PFD) reports involving medicines for people living in care homes could add to this evidence base. METHODS: PFD reports made publicly available between 2017 and 2021 classified as 'care home-related deaths' were reviewed. Reports describing medicines and/or medicines processes were identified. Contributory factors within these reports were then identified. RESULTS: Within the timeframe, 156 reports were published, and 25 described medicines (n = 27) or medicines processes (n = 5) concerning people living in care homes. The impact of medicines and/or medicines processes was quantified as no impact (n = 7), contributory (n = 6) and direct (n = 14) per report. Two key themes emerged. Four deaths had an association between their falls risk, prescribed anticoagulants, and the failure of the service to seek timely emergency care following a fall and two deaths concerned endocrine medicines, where people refused insulin or blood sugar monitoring and staff did not seek timely advice. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated PFD reports provide an insight into the potential association between medicines, and other aspects of the person's care in causing harm.

Pharmacist-led medicines optimisation service in an inpatient mental health setting.

Medicines optimisation ensures that people get the best possible outcomes from their medicines. As those with severe mental illness (SMI) are frequently prescribed psychotropic medicines with potentially significant side-effects, poor adherence to treatment and physical morbidity are common. This results in suboptimal symptom control, physical health problems and negative health outcomes. The specialist mental health pharmacist (SMHP) is best placed to provide leadership for medicines optimisation in the inpatient mental health setting. By adopting a patient-centred approach to providing information, improving adherence, screening, initiating and maintaining medicines, and supporting self-advocacy, the SMHP can ensure the patients' experience of taking medicines is optimised. As there is currently limited understanding of what a baseline clinical pharmacy service in a mental health setting looks like, we aim to outline a framework for pharmacist-led medicines optimisation for those with SMI. This framework is suitable to be scaled and adapted to other settings.

Prescribing medicines in people with renal impairment.

Kidney disease is a common occurrence and alters how the body processes many drugs. Therefore, prescribers must consider the person's renal function before prescribing medicines and may need to amend the dose of renally excreted drugs. At present, there is limited data regarding dose adjustment in renal impairment, so prescribers require knowledge of pharmacokinetics. Prescribers also need to understand how the kidneys process drugs when functioning normally to be able to predict how renal impairment may affect pharmacokinetics. This article offers practical guidance on prescribing for adults who have stable chronic kidney disease and do not meet the criteria for specialist assessment. It also explores important steps that prescribers can take to optimise medicines use in this population.

Benefits of deprescribing for older people with frailty and polypharmacy: part one.

The UK population is ageing rapidly, a trend that is likely to continue due to improvements in chronic disease management and increased life expectancy. Comorbidities, including frailty, become increasingly common with age and as a result it is likely that multiple medicines will be prescribed for older people, leading to polypharmacy. This is a concern because polypharmacy is associated with various adverse effects and an increased medicine burden in this population, as well as a financial burden for the healthcare system. This article, the first of two parts, explains the physiology of ageing and frailty, and considers the adverse effects of polypharmacy on older people with frailty, using a fictional case study to illustrate this. Part two will use the case study to explore the use of medication reviews and deprescribing benefits as part of medicines optimisation.

What makes a multidisciplinary medication review and deprescribing intervention for older people work well in primary care? A realist review and synthesis.

BACKGROUND: A third of older people take five or more regular medications (polypharmacy). Conducting medication reviews in primary care is key to identify and reduce/ stop inappropriate medications (deprescribing). Recent recommendations for effective deprescribing include shared-decision making and a multidisciplinary approach. Our aim was to understand when, why, and how interventions for medication review and deprescribing in primary care involving multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) work (or do not work) for older people. METHODS: A realist synthesis following the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards guidelines was completed. A scoping literature review informed the generation of an initial programme theory. Systematic searches of different databases were conducted, and documents screened for eligibility, with data extracted based on a Context, Mechanisms, Outcome (CMO) configuration to develop further our programme theory. Documents were appraised based on assessments of relevance and rigour. A Stakeholder consultation with 26 primary care health care professionals (HCPs), 10 patients and three informal carers was conducted to test and refine the programme theory. Data synthesis was underpinned by Normalisation Process Theory to identify key mechanisms to enhance the implementation of MDT medication review and deprescribing in primary care. FINDINGS: A total of 2821 abstracts and 175 full-text documents were assessed for eligibility, with 28 included. Analysis of documents alongside stakeholder consultation outlined 33 CMO configurations categorised under four themes: 1) HCPs roles, responsibilities and relationships; 2) HCPs training and education; 3) the format and process of the medication review 4) involvement and education of patients and informal carers. A number of key mechanisms were identified including clearly defined roles and good communication between MDT members, integration of pharmacists in the team, simulation-based training or team building training, targeting high-risk patients, using deprescribing tools and drawing on expertise of other HCPs (e.g., nurses and frailty practitioners), involving patents and carers in the process, starting with 'quick wins', offering deprescribing as 'drug holidays', and ensuring appropriate and tailored follow-up plans that allow continuity of care and management. CONCLUSION: We identified key mechanisms that could inform the design of future interventions and services that successfully embed deprescribing in primary care.

Benefits of deprescribing for older people with frailty and polypharmacy: part two.

Polypharmacy is a significant issue for many older people, including those with frailty, and it is associated with a range of adverse effects. Therefore, it is important to address polypharmacy by optimising patients' medicines use. Medication reviews are one of the main approaches to medicines optimisation, and various tools are available to support healthcare professionals with conducting these. Another approach is deprescribing, which can improve health outcomes for patients and may have financial benefits for healthcare organisations, but can also present various challenges. This article, the second of two parts, explores the benefits of medicines optimisation in the form of medication reviews and deprescribing for older people with frailty and polypharmacy.

The role of pharmacists in supporting service users to optimise antipsychotic medication.

Pharmacists have a contribution to make in improving optimising medication use for people on antipsychotic medication. The rates of prescribing antipsychotics have increased in England with an 18% rise from 2015 to 2020. People on antipsychotic medication are not treated as equal partners in conversations about their medications. This can leave people to make decisions about their antipsychotic medications without input from their prescribers which can have significant consequences for individuals. Involving people in the decision-making process, as experts on their own condition, has the potential to improve treatment outcomes. The evidence suggests that involving pharmacists in supporting people with serious mental illnesses will lead to improved clinical outcomes. Key areas for pharmacist involvement are providing information, education and counselling on antipsychotic medication and the side effects and reducing polypharmacy especially when antipsychotics are prescribed off license.

Exploring the implementation of Discharge Medicines Review referrals by hospital pharmacy professionals: A qualitative study using the consolidated framework for implementation research.

BACKGROUND: The Discharge Medicines Review (DMR) is a community pharmacy service in Wales that aims to reduce medicines-related harm after care transitions, including hospital discharge. To undertake a DMR, the Community Pharmacist must receive a patient's discharge medicines information, either electronically, by fax or presented by the patient. Although the DMR has evidenced benefits for improving patient safety, its evaluation showed inconsistent uptake, which Community Pharmacists partially attributed to hospitals not providing the necessary information. OBJECTIVE: Aiming to develop recommendations to improve hospital engagement to DMR referrals, this study explores hospital pharmacy professionals' views of the service. METHODS: Qualitative focus groups, using hermeneutic phenomenology, were conducted in 16 hospitals across Wales, using a quota sampling method to include 61 Pharmacists and 31 Pharmacy Technicians. To understand the suboptimal engagement to DMR referrals, framework analysis was undertaken using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS: The data were mapped onto all five CFIR domains, each containing barriers and facilitators to engagement with DMR referrals and suggestions for improvement. Only one hospital had successfully implemented DMR referrals, with many participants lacking any knowledge of the service or how to refer to it. Specific barriers included a clear absence of processes to implement referrals and engage hospital pharmacy professionals. A considerable barrier was many participants' perceptions that Community Pharmacist roles were less clinically orientated and patient-centred than their own, viewing them almost as a different profession. Participants believed that local champions for DMR referrals could promote engagement and integrate them into the workflow of hospital pharmacy professionals. Further recommendations to improve engagement was staff training for DMRs and regular feedback of its value. CONCLUSION: Policymakers may use the findings and recommendations from this study to promote hospital pharmacy staff engagement to similar community pharmacy services like the Discharge Medicines Service in England.

Comprehensive pharmacological geriatric assessment compared to usual care in an older adult with cancer in the absence of polypharmacy.

INTRODUCTION: Medication reconciliation as part of a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment by a specialist pharmacist is a process that has been shown to be beneficial in terms of medication adherence in patients taking oral anticancer medication and potentially cost-effective in cancer patients. Medication review guidelines in older adults with cancer suggest using polypharmacy (≥ 5 medications) as an indication for medication review in older adults with cancer. CASE REPORT: We present a case where a medication review as part of a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment in the absence of polypharmacy resulted in two pharmacist interventions when standard care resulted in no intervention. A 71-year-old male prescribed capecitabine for rectal cancer had a medication reconciliation done as standard care before starting an oral anticancer medication. He then proceeded to get a medication review as part of a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment and was deemed to have a potentially excessive anticholinergic burden and underprescribed gastro protection. This case is interesting as it occurred in a patient who would not have met the current inclusion criteria for a medication review as part of a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment. MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOME: As a result of the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, a letter was written to the patient's general practitioner, recommending a change to anti-depressant therapy to optimise anticholinergic burden, as well as introducing a proton-pump inhibitor upon completion of the Capecitabine protocol concurrent with radiotherapy, to confer gastro-protection against the antidepressant medication, as per the START criteria. Upon discharge from medical oncology, neither of the changes had been adopted by the patient's general practitioner. This highlights one of the challenges facing clinical pharmacists in an outpatient setting, where evidence-based recommendations are not always implemented as care transitions from tertiary to primary care. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment is a process that identifies potential issues in older adults with cancer that aren't identified with standard medication review. This is also evident for medication reviews as part of a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, and where resources allow, and recommendations are likely to be accepted, it should be offered to all older adults with cancer. Pharmacists are still faced with challenges in implementing recommendations from medication reviews, particularly in healthcare systems where pharmacist prescribing has yet to be introduced.