'We didn't cause the opioid epidemic': The experiences of Australians prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain at a time of increasing restrictions.

INTRODUCTION: Many countries have implemented strategies to reduce opioid-related harms, including policies and prescribing restrictions. This study aimed to explore the lived experiences of Australians prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) in the context of increasing restrictions for accessing opioids. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 Australians (aged 24-65-years; 10 female/4 male) self-reporting regular use of prescribed opioids for CNCP. Participants were asked to describe their experiences using prescribed opioids, and perceived and actual changes in pain management including access to treatments. Using thematic analysis, four dominant themes were identified. RESULTS: In 'On them for a reason': Opioids as a last resort, participants described the role of opioids as an important tool for pain management following unsuccessful treatment using other strategies. In 'You're problematic': Deepening stigma, participants described how increased attention and restrictions led to increasing stigma of opioid use and CNCP. In 'We didn't cause the opioid epidemic': Perceiving and redirecting blame, participants described feeling unfairly blamed for public health problems and an 'opioid epidemic' they described as 'imported' from America, drawing distinctions between legitimate and illegitimate opioid use. Finally, in 'Where do we go from here?': Fearing the future, participants described anticipating further restrictions and associating these with increased pain and disability. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The experience of being prescribed opioids for CNCP in Australia in the context of increasing restrictions was characterised by stigma, blame and fear. There is a need to ensure people prescribed opioids for pain are considered when designing measures to reduce opioid-related harms.

The accessibility of pharmacist prescribing and impacts on medicines access: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacist prescribing has been introduced in several countries as a strategy to improve access to health care and medicines. However, the direct impacts of pharmacist prescribing on medicines access, and the overall accessibility of pharmacist prescribing services, are not well known. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to assess the direct impacts of pharmacist prescribing on medicines access, and the accessibility of pharmacist prescribing services, in community and primary care settings. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL were searched for studies published in English between 01 January 2003 to 15 June 2023. Both quantitative and qualitative primary studies were included if they described pharmacist prescribing in a primary care setting. Outcomes included findings related to access to medicines as a result of pharmacist prescribing (primary outcome), and access to pharmacist prescribing services overall (secondary outcome). Narrative synthesis of outcomes was undertaken. RESULTS: A total of 47 studies were included from four countries (United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand). Thirteen studies provided evidence that pharmacist prescribing may improve medicines access in several ways, including: increasing the proportion of eligible people receiving medicines, increasing the number of overall dispensed prescriptions, or reducing time to receipt of treatment. The remainder of the included studies reported on the accessibility of pharmacist prescribing services. Published studies highlight that pharmacist prescribers practicing in community settings are generally accessible, with pharmacist prescribers viewed by patients as easy and convenient to consult. There was limited evidence about the affordability of pharmacy prescribing services, and a number of potential equity issues were observed, including reduced access to pharmacist prescribers in more socioeconomically disadvantaged areas and those with greater proportions of populations at risk of health inequities, such as culturally and linguistically diverse communities. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review found that pharmacist prescribing services were both highly accessible and beneficial in improving access to medicines. However, measures of medicines access varied, and few studies included direct measures of medicines access as an outcome of pharmacist prescribing, highlighting a need for future studies to incorporate direct measures of medicines access when assessing the impact of pharmacist prescribing services.

Age-Related Risk of Serious Fall Events and Opioid Analgesic Use.

Importance: Opioid analgesics may be associated with increased risk of falls, particularly among older adults. Objective: To quantify the age-related risk of serious fall events among adults prescribed opioids by opioid exposure, time from initiation, and daily dose. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study conducted in New South Wales, Australia, used data linking national pharmaceutical claims to national and state datasets, including information on sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, medicines use, health services utilization, and mortality (POPPY II study). It included adults (18 years or older) who initiated prescription opioid treatment, which was defined as no prior dispensing during the preceding 365 days, between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from February to June 2023. Exposure: Time-dependent periods of opioid exposure were evaluated from dispensing records. Main Outcome and Measures: Serious fall events identified from emergency department, hospitalization, and mortality records. Negative binomial models were used to assess associations between time-dependent opioid exposure (overall, by time from initiation, and by dose), age, and risk of fall events. Models were adjusted for known fall risk factors, including other fall risk-increasing drugs, frailty risk, and prior serious fall events. Results: The cohort comprised 3 212 369 individuals who initiated prescription opioid treatment (1 702 332 women [53%]; median [IQR] age at initiation, 49 [32-65] years). Overall, 506 573 serious fall events were identified, including 5210 fatal falls. During exposure to opioids, the risk of serious fall events was elevated among all age groups; compared with the group aged 18 to 44 years, this risk was highest among those 85 years or older (adjusted incident rate ratio, 6.35; 95% CI, 6.20-6.51). Across all age groups, the first 28 days following opioid initiation was a time of increased serious fall risk; this risk increased with age. Among individuals aged 18 to 84 years, associations were identified between higher daily opioid doses and serious fall events. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study suggest that prescription opioids were associated with increased risk of serious fall events among adults of all ages, with individuals 85 years or older at greatest risk. These risks should be considered when prescribing opioids, particularly for individuals with preexisting risk factors or when opioids are prescribed at higher doses. Targeted falls prevention efforts may be most effective within the first month following opioid initiation.

Five-Year Trajectories of Prescription Opioid Use.

Importance: There are known risks of using opioids for extended periods. However, less is known about the long-term trajectories of opioid use following initiation. Objective: To identify 5-year trajectories of prescription opioid use, and to examine the characteristics of each trajectory group. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study conducted in New South Wales, Australia, linked national pharmaceutical claims data to 10 national and state data sets to determine sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, drug use, and health services use. The cohort included adult residents (aged ≥18 years) of New South Wales who initiated a prescription opioid between July 1, 2003, and December 31, 2018. Statistical analyses were conducted from February to September 2022. Exposure: Dispensing of a prescription opioid, with no evidence of opioid dispensing in the preceding 365 days, identified from pharmaceutical claims data. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the trajectories of monthly opioid use over 60 months from opioid initiation. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to classify these trajectories. Linked health care data sets were used to examine characteristics of individuals in different trajectory groups. Results: Among 3 474 490 individuals who initiated a prescription opioid (1 831 230 females [52.7%]; mean [SD] age, 49.7 [19.3] years), 5 trajectories of long-term opioid use were identified: very low use (75.4%), low use (16.6%), moderate decreasing to low use (2.6%), low increasing to moderate use (2.6%), and sustained use (2.8%). Compared with individuals in the very low use trajectory group, those in the sustained use trajectory group were older (age ≥65 years: 22.0% vs 58.4%); had more comorbidities, including cancer (4.1% vs 22.2%); had increased health services contact, including hospital admissions (36.9% vs 51.6%); had higher use of psychotropic (16.4% vs 42.4%) and other analgesic drugs (22.9% vs 47.3%) prior to opioid initiation, and were initiated on stronger opioids (20.0% vs 50.2%). Conclusions and relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that most individuals commencing treatment with prescription opioids had relatively low and time-limited exposure to opioids over a 5-year period. The small proportion of individuals with sustained or increasing use was older with more comorbidities and use of psychotropic and other analgesic drugs, likely reflecting a higher prevalence of pain and treatment needs in these individuals.

"Frustrated with the whole system": a qualitative framework analysis of the issues faced by people accessing health services for chronic pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is complex and often requires multimodal management comprising of both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. To inform delivery of CNCP management, it is important to understand how current health services providing non-pharmacological treatments are accessed by exploring the experiences of people attempting to access services. In doing so, this study sought to explore the underlying drivers of service access barriers. METHODS: This study explored the experiences of Australians accessing services for CNCP using semi-structured telephone interviews undertaken between 01 October 2020 and 31 March 2021. Thematic analysis was guided by Levesque et al.'s 2013 conceptual framework of access to health care, with emerging themes mapped to five dimensions of accessibility and corresponding abilities of consumers: Approachability/Ability to perceive; Acceptability/Ability to seek; Availability and Accommodation/Ability to reach; Affordability/Ability to pay; and Appropriateness/Ability to engage. RESULTS: The 26 participants (aged 24-78 years, 22 female) reported accessing a range of services including general practitioners (GP), allied health services, and specialised pain clinics, for a variety of conditions. Three themes were mapped to accessibility dimensions (in brackets): 'GP as guide or gatekeeper' (Approachability); 'Outside of my control' (Availability and Accommodation; Affordability); and 'Services aren't always good enough' (Appropriateness). A fourth identified theme illustrated how participants responded to encountering these barriers: 'Leading my own pain management'. Participant experiences suggest problems with the translation of contemporary pain management principles into practice, including continued application of biomedical health models as opposed to the biopsychosocial model, and demonstrate systemic issues with service delivery, including a lack of benchmarking of specialised services. CONCLUSIONS: The identified themes highlight several evidence-to-practice gaps in the delivery of health services for people with CNCP in Australia. To address these gaps, there is a need for improved clinician training, increased investment in specialised pain services, and development of clear primary care pathways for CNCP management for evidence-based multimodal pain management to be accessible and equitable.

Self-reported challenges obtaining ongoing prescription opioids among Australians with chronic non-cancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Policies to address opioid-related harms include strategies to reduce opioid prescribing for new and ongoing pain management. Concerns have been raised that people with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) may be adversely affected by prescribing restrictions, and by involuntary tapering and cessation of opioids. We describe self-reported challenges obtaining prescription opioids among people prescribed opioids long-term for CNCP and explore associations with participant and treatment characteristics. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analysed data from a longitudinal cohort study of Australians prescribed restricted opioids for CNCP. In 2018, 861 participants who took part in Year 5 follow-up and who also reported past 12-month opioid use were asked about challenges obtaining opioid prescriptions, including prescriber access-related difficulties obtaining prescriptions or having opioids tapered or ceased involuntarily. Associations between challenges and demographics, treatment characteristics including daily opioid dose as oral morphine equivalent milligrams (OME mg/day), substance use disorder (SUD), and opioid dependence were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 285 (31%) participants reported at least one challenge, predominantly prescriber access-related difficulties (n=177/285; 62%). Prescriber access-related difficulties were associated with younger age (adjustedOR 0.94 per year increase, 95%CI 0.93-0.96), and past 12-month pharmaceutical opioid dependence (adjustedOR 2.25, 95%CI 1.33-3.80). Involuntary opioid tapering or cessation was reported by 73 participants (26% of those reporting challenges) and was associated with lifetime SUD diagnosis (adjustedOR 2.15, 95%CI 1.15-3.90), and opioid doses of ≥200 OME mg/day (adjustedOR 2.41, 95%CI 1.18-4.88). CONCLUSION: One-third of participants with CNCP reported experiencing challenges obtaining prescriptions for opioids or having their opioid medicines involuntarily reduced. Given increasing restrictions to opioid access, it is important that strategies to reduce opioid-related harms are balanced against the current treatment needs of people prescribed opioids long-term for CNCP.

Use of pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments for chronic noncancer pain among people using opioids: a longitudinal cohort study.

ABSTRACT: Although multimodal management of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is recommended, long-term treatment utilization patterns among people using opioids are not well known. The Pain and Opioids IN Treatment study recruited Australian adults receiving opioids for CNCP for more than 6 weeks from community pharmacies. Pharmacological (opioid and nonopioid analgesics and psychotropic medicines) and nonpharmacological (physical, mental health, and specialized) treatments used in the previous 12 months and 30 days were collected annually over 4 years (2015-2018). Associations were explored between 30-day treatment use and sociodemographic characteristics and pain measures. Overall, 1334 participants completed at least one annual follow-up. The median pain severity (5.0, interquartile range [IQR] 3.8 to 6.3) and pain interference scores (5.7, IQR 3.9-7.3) indicated moderate pain throughout the study period, despite most participants reporting the use of nonopioid pharmacological (12 month: 97.6% and 30 day: 96.8%) and nonpharmacological treatments (12 month: 91.8% and 30 day: 66.1%). Some treatment use was inconsistent with guidelines: ongoing nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and sedative-hypnotic use were common, whereas fewer people engaged with pain management programs (12 month: 22.3%). Private health insurance was associated with using physical (adjusted odds ratio 1.61, 99.5% confidence intervals 1.15-2.24) and specialized nonpharmacological treatments (adjusted odds ratio 1.47, 99.5% confidence intervals 1.14-1.91). This study demonstrates that many Australians taking opioids long-term for CNCP also use nonopioid pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments. The use of pharmacological treatments including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, psychotropic medicines, and gabapentinoids, outside guidelines, warrants review. Furthermore, despite Australia's universal healthcare scheme subsidising some nonpharmacological treatments, overall use of these treatments was associated with having private health insurance, highlighting a need for more equitable service provision.

Impact of Medication Regimen Simplification on Medication Incidents in Residential Aged Care: SIMPLER Randomized Controlled Trial.

In the SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm care Residents (SIMPLER) cluster-randomized controlled trial, we investigated the impact of a structured medication regimen simplification intervention on medication incidents in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) over a 12-month follow-up. A clinical pharmacist applied the validated 5-step Medication Regimen Simplification Guide for Residential Aged CarE (MRS GRACE) for 96 of the 99 participating residents in the four intervention RACFs. The 143 participating residents in the comparison RACFs received usual care. Over 12 months, medication incident rates were 95 and 66 per 100 resident-years in the intervention and comparison groups, respectively (adjusted incident rate ratio (IRR) 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-2.38). The 12-month pre/post incident rate almost halved among participants in the intervention group (adjusted IRR 0.56; 95%CI 0.38-0.80). A significant reduction in 12-month pre/post incident rate was also observed in the comparison group (adjusted IRR 0.67, 95%CI 0.50-0.90). Medication incidents over 12 months were often minor in severity. Declines in 12-month pre/post incident rates were observed in both study arms; however, rates were not significantly different among residents who received and did not receive a one-off structured medication regimen simplification intervention.

Educating junior doctors and pharmacists to reduce discharge prescribing of opioids for surgical patients: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether educating junior doctors and hospital pharmacists about analgesic prescribing improved discharge prescribing of opioids for opioid-naïve patients after surgical admissions. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial, undertaken during the first half of 2019. SETTING: The Alfred Hospital, a major Melbourne teaching hospital with 13 surgical units. PARTICIPANTS: Opioid-naïve patients discharged from surgical units after a stay of at least 24 hours. INTERVENTION: Surgical units were randomised to the intervention or control arms. Interns, residents, and clinical pharmacists assigned to intervention arm units attended education sessions, presented by the hospital analgesic stewardship pharmacist, about appropriate analgesic prescribing for patients in hospital surgical units. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The patients prescribed slow release opioids on discharge from hospital during the baseline (1 February - 30 April 2018) and post-intervention periods (17 February - 30 April 2019). RESULTS: During the baseline period, 1369 intervention unit and 1014 control unit admissions were included in our analysis; during the evaluation period, 973 intervention unit and 706 control unit episodes were included. After adjusting for age, length of stay, pain score, acute pain service involvement, and use of immediate release opioids prior to admission, patients in the intervention group were prescribed slow release opioids at discharge less frequently than patients in the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35-0.77) and were more frequently discharged without any prescribed opioids following the intervention (aOR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.24-2.30). Providing de-escalation plans was more frequent for intervention than control group patients prescribed slow release opioids on discharge post-intervention (OR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.25-4.45). CONCLUSIONS: Specific education for clinicians and pharmacists about appropriate analgesic prescribing for surgical patients is effective in reducing prescribing of opioids at discharge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618000876291 (prospective).

The impact of an innovative pharmacist-led inpatient opioid de-escalation intervention in post-operative orthopedic patients.

OBJECTIVE: Many patients are discharged from hospital after surgery with excessive doses of opioid, and prescription opioid addiction has become a serious public health problem. Inpatient opioid de-escalation performed by clinical phar-macists may assist in reducing opioids before discharge. We aimed to evaluate whether clinical pharmacist-led opioid de-escalation for inpatients after orthopedic surgery led to significant reductions in opioid use at discharge, without resulting in greater pain intensity and side effects. DESIGN: This retrospective pre-/post-intervention study evaluated patients before and after implementation of a phar-macist-led opioid de-escalation service. SETTING: A major tertiary institution. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety eight participants underwent de-escalation, and 98 controls received standard care following ortho-pedic surgery. INTERVENTION: Pharmacist-led opioid de-escalation was initiated after discharge from the institution's Acute Pain Service. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary outcome was total morphine oral equivalence (MOE) required in the 24-hours before discharge between the two groups. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity scores and opioid-related side effects. RESULTS: The post-intervention group used significantly less opioids in the 24 hours preceding discharge compared with the precohort (total MOE 30 vs 45 mg; p = 0.025).There were no differences in pain intensity at rest (p = 0.19) or with movement (p = 0.19). Cases experienced significantly less constipation (29 vs 49 percent; p = 0.004); no differences were observed for other side effects. DISCUSSION: We observed statistically similar pain intensity ratings, in the setting of significantly lowered opioid doses among the post-intervention group prior to discharge. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist-led inpatient opioid de-escalation is effective, does not increase pain intensity, and reduces constipation. Hospitals should explore the viability of extending pharmacist-led opioid de-escalation to other surgical patients and following hospital discharge, aiming for opioid cessation.

Impact of Medication Regimen Simplification on Medication Administration Times and Health Outcomes in Residential Aged Care: 12 Month Follow Up of the SIMPLER Randomized Controlled Trial.

In the SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm care Residents (SIMPLER) cluster-randomized controlled trial, we evaluated the impact of structured medication regimen simplification on medication administration times, falls, hospitalization, and mortality at 8 residential aged care facilities (RACFs) at 12 month follow up. In total, 242 residents taking ≥1 medication regularly were included. Opportunities for simplification among participants at 4 RACFs were identified using the validated Medication Regimen Simplification Guide for Residential Aged CarE (MRS GRACE). Simplification was possible for 62 of 99 residents in the intervention arm. Significant reductions in the mean number of daily medication administration times were observed at 8 months (-0.38, 95% confidence intervals (CI) -0.69 to -0.07) and 12 months (-0.47, 95%CI -0.84 to -0.09) in the intervention compared to the comparison arm. A higher incidence of falls was observed in the intervention arm (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 2.20, 95%CI 1.33 to 3.63) over 12-months, which was primarily driven by a high falls rate in one intervention RACF and a simultaneous decrease in comparison RACFs. No significant differences in hospitalizations (IRR 1.78, 95%CI 0.57-5.53) or mortality (relative risk 0.81, 95%CI 0.48-1.38) over 12 months were observed. Medication simplification achieves sustained reductions in medication administration times and should be implemented using a structured resident-centered approach that incorporates clinical judgement.

Reducing the Burden of Complex Medication Regimens: SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm care Residents (SIMPLER) Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the application of a structured process to consolidate the number of medication administration times for residents of aged care facilities. DESIGN: A nonblinded, matched-pair, cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Permanent residents who were English-speaking and taking at least 1 regular medication, recruited from 8 South Australian residential aged care facilities (RACFs). METHODS: The intervention involved a clinical pharmacist applying a validated 5-step tool to identify opportunities to reduce medication complexity (eg, by administering medications at the same time or through use of longer-acting or combination formulations). Residents in the comparison group received routine care. The primary outcome at 4-month follow-up was the number of administration times per day for medications charted regularly. Resident satisfaction and quality of life were secondary outcomes. Harms included falls, medication incidents, hospitalizations, and mortality. The association between the intervention and primary outcome was estimated using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Overall, 99 residents participated in the intervention arm and 143 in the comparison arm. At baseline, the mean resident age was 86 years, 74% were female, and medications were taken an average of 4 times daily. Medication simplification was possible for 62 (65%) residents in the intervention arm, with 57 (62%) of 92 simplification recommendations implemented at follow-up. The mean number of administration times at follow-up was reduced in the intervention arm in comparison to usual care (-0.36, 95% confidence interval -0.63 to -0.09, P = .01). No significant changes in secondary outcomes or harms were observed. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: One-off application of a structured tool to reduce regimen complexity is a low-risk intervention to reduce the burden of medication administration in RACFs and may enable staff to shift time to other resident care activities.

Prescriber Education Interventions to Optimize Opioid Prescribing in Acute Care: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Opioid medications are frequently used effectively for analgesia in acute settings, however, they are associated with dependence and addiction, and were implicated in 47,600 American fatalities in 2017. Evidence suggests that despite guidelines and professional body recommendations, acute prescribing remains highly variable. Educational interventions targeting prescribers have potential to optimize prescribing in-line with evidence-based best practice. OBJECTIVES: To identify the objective impacts of education interventions on opioid prescribing in the acute care setting. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic literature review. SETTING: The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane for works published until December 31, 2018. Bibliographies of relevant studies and the gray literature were also searched. METHODS: Databases were searched for interventional studies (clinical trials and pre- and poststudies). Studies describing an educational intervention delivered to clinicians and reporting at least one objective measure of opioid use in the acute care setting were included. Studies reporting only subjective outcomes and those focused on chronic pain or set in primary care were excluded. Two reviewers (RB, TB) extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies using the Downs and Black Tool. RESULTS: Nine studies met inclusion criteria; all used pre- and postdesigns. Three studies described stand-alone education, and the others described multifaceted interventions. All 9 interventions significantly reduced at least one of the following: high-risk agent use including meperidine use by up to 71%; total or daily dosage of opioids at discharge, including median morphine milligram equivalence (MME) from 90 mg to 45 mg per patient; and quantity of medications such as oxycodone supplied to patients, halved in one study from 6,170 expected to 2,932 supplied tablets. No increase in pain complaints or prescription refill requests were reported in those studies assessing these outcomes. The longest study examined prescribing 15 months after education delivery, reporting sustained practice changes. LIMITATIONS: Overall study quality was fair to poor. Significant heterogeneity in settings, patient groups, methodologies, and outcomes prevented pooled quantitative analysis. No studies examined all available opioid agents or formulations. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support prescriber education as an effective strategy to reduce opioid use and optimize prescribing in acute settings. Further research, particularly high quality randomized studies, describing the impact of education on all available opioid formulations and total MME is required. Reviewing the existing literature has offered useful models that can be implemented to improve care with opioid prescribing in acute settings. KEY WORDS: Opioids, education, physician education, prescriber education, opioid education, opioid prescribing, systematic review, prescriptions, prevention.

An Observational Analysis of Medication Use During 5,727 Medical Emergency Team Activations at a Tertiary Referral Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Medical emergency teams (METs) rescue deteriorating patients as the response arm of hospital rapid response systems. This study aimed to (1) investigate medication use during MET activations by describing the type, frequency and access sources of medications; and (2) assess associations between patient characteristics, MET activation criteria, and outcomes and MET medication use. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective study from a prospective database of MET activations in an Australian tertiary referral hospital was undertaken. Consecutive adult MET activations over a 12-month period were included. RESULTS: Across the study period, there were 5,727 MET activations with medications used at 33.5% (n = 1,920). Of 2,648 medications used, cardiac system agents (n = 944; 35.6%) were the most common category used, while intravenous electrolytes (n = 341; 12.9%) and opioid analgesics (n = 248; 9.4%).were the most frequently used medications. Most commonly, medications were sourced from ward stocks. High blood pressure, heart or respiratory rate, pain, and multiple activation criteria were associated with MET medication use (p < 0.001). Patients who required medications were less likely to remain on the ward, and immediate admission to the ICU was approximately doubled (odds ratio = 1.90; 95% confidence interval = 1.47-2.45). CONCLUSION: Medication use by the MET was common and associated with escalation to intensive care. A wide variety of medications, principally from ward stocks, were used with some predictability based on activation criteria. Local system improvements have demonstrated that by focusing on common MET syndromes and medications, further investigation can refine and improve medication use and management systems for deteriorating patients.

Unintentional mortality associated with paracetamol and codeine preparations, with and without doxylamine, in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Misuse of paracetamol, codeine and doxylamine combination analgesics may lead to addiction and mortality. This study aimed to (1) identify unintentional deaths in Australia associated with use of combination analgesic products containing paracetamol, codeine and doxylamine; (2) describe cases characteristics, including demographics and additional medication use; and (3) identify common factors associated with misuse and mortality of these medicines in Australia. DESIGN: This retrospective case series analysed National Coronial Information System data to identify cases of unintentional death attributable to paracetamol, codeine and doxylamine products between 2002 and 2012. SETTING: Three Eastern Australian states: New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, comprising a population of approximately 18.6 million people. RESULTS: 441 unintentional deaths attributed to paracetamol/codeine products were identified; doxylamine was detected in 102 cases (23%). Overall unintentional death rates rose from 0.9-per-million in 2002 to 3.6-per-million in 2009, declining to 1.9-per-million in 2012. Median age at time of death was 48, half of all cases occurred between 35-54 years of age, and 57% were female. Concomitant medication use was detected in 79% of cases, including benzodiazepines, other opioids, psychiatric medications, alcohol and illicit drugs. Behaviours consistent with drug misuse including doctor/pharmacy shopping, excessive dosages and extended use, were identified in 24% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified 441 deaths associated with codeine-combination analgesic products across three Australian states; with an average of 40 deaths per year. Death commonly involved multiple substance use and abuse behaviours indicative of misuse and dependence.

Comparing the accuracy of medication order verification between pharmacists and a tech check tech model: A prospective randomised observational study.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors have the potential to cause significant harm and the final verification of dispensed medications is essential to patient safety. There is international evidence to demonstrate that trained pharmacy technicians can safely and accurately undertake the verification of medication orders in ward-based unit dose containers. There is a need for evaluation of pharmacy technician verification of medication orders in broader contexts including the hospital inpatient dispensary. AIM: To compare the accuracy of Accuracy Checking Pharmacy Assistants (ACPTs) to pharmacists when verifying inpatient medication orders within the hospital pharmacy setting. METHOD: This 'real world' single-blinded study was conducted in the inpatient dispensary of a major tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Inpatient medication orders were randomly allocated to an ACPT or pharmacist for final verification, before being reviewed for accuracy by an independent research pharmacist blinded to study allocation. Errors identified by the reviewing pharmacist were documented and severity was assessed by an independent Medication Safety pharmacist. RESULTS: Between February and August 2014, three ACPTs verified 4718 items with 75 errors missed (1.59%), and twelve pharmacists verified 4194 items with 158 errors missed (3.77%). There was a statistically significant difference between both total and minor error rates, with pharmacists missing significantly more errors (total errors: p < 0.0001; minor errors: 1.42 vs 3.53%; p < 0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of major errors missed by the two groups (0.17 vs 0.24%; p = 0.48). CONCLUSION: This study is the first of its kind in the hospital dispensary setting, demonstrating that the overall accuracy of ACPTs was greater than pharmacists for verifying dispensed medication orders. ACPTs missed fewer minor and overall errors than pharmacists, indicating that trained pharmacy technicians can verify medication orders safely and accurately. This study provides support for the tech-check-tech model in the hospital setting.

Evaluation of NovoRapid infusion as a treatment option in the management of diabetic ketoacidosis.

This study evaluates the clinical efficacy and safety of NovoRapid (insulin aspart) compared to Actrapid™ (human neutral insulin) for diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). In this retrospective study involving 40 patients, no statistically significant differences were observed between biochemical variables, infusion duration or complications in patients treated with insulin aspart or human neutral insulin. These results support the use of insulin aspart as an effective and safe alternative to human neutral insulin in DKA.