Clinical competence, communication ability and adherence to choosing wisely recommendations for lipid reducing drug use in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Although lipid-lowering drugs are not recommended for primary prevention in patients 75+, prevalence of use is high and there is unexplained variation in prescribing between physicians. The objective of this study was to determine if physician communication ability and clinical competence are associated with prescribing lipid-lowering drugs for primary and secondary prevention. METHODS: We used a cohort of 4,501 international medical graduates, 161,214 U.S. Medicare patients with hyperlipidemia (primary prevention) and 49,780 patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (secondary prevention) not treated with lipid-lowering therapy who were seen by study physicians in ambulatory care. Clinical competence and communication ability were measured by the ECFMG clinical assessment examination. Physician citizenship, age, gender, specialty and patient characteristics were also measured. The outcome was an incident prescription of lipid-lowering drug, evaluated using multivariable GEE logistic regression models for primary and secondary prevention for patients 75+ and 65-74. RESULTS: Patients 75+ were less likely than those 65-74 to receive lipid-lowering drugs for primary (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.59-0.66) and secondary (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.63-0.78) prevention. For every 20% increase in clinical competence score, the odds of prescribing therapy for primary prevention to patients 75+ increased by 24% (95% CI 1.02-1.5). Communication ability had the opposite effect, reducing the odds of prescribing for primary prevention by 11% per 20% score increase (95% CI 0.8-0.99) for both age groups. Physicians who were citizens of countries with higher proportions of Hispanic (South/Central America) or Asian (Asia/Oceania) people were more likely to prescribe treatment for primary prevention, and internal medicine specialists were more likely to treat for secondary prevention than primary care physicians. CONCLUSION: Clinical competence, communication ability and physician citizenship are associated with lipid-lowering drug prescribing for primary prevention in patients aged 75+.

Do clinical and communication skills scores on credentialing exams predict potentially inappropriate antibiotic prescribing?

BACKGROUND: There is considerable variation among physicians in inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, which is hypothesized to be attributable to diagnostic uncertainty and ineffective communication. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether clinical and communication skills are associated with antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory infections and sinusitis. METHODS: A cohort study of 2,526 international medical graduates and 48,394 U.S. Medicare patients diagnosed by study physicians with an upper respiratory infection or sinusitis between July 2014 and November 2015 was conducted. Clinical and communication skills were measured by scores achieved on the Clinical Skills Assessment examination administered by the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG) as a requirement for entry into U.S residency programs. Medicare Part D data were used to determine whether patients were dispensed an antibiotic following an outpatient evaluation and management visit with the study physician. Physician age, sex, specialty and practice region were retrieved from the ECFMG databased and American Medical Association (AMA) Masterfile. Multivariate GEE logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between clinical and communication skills and antibiotic prescribing, adjusting for other physician and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Physicians prescribed an antibiotic in 71.1% of encounters in which a patient was diagnosed with sinusitis, and 50.5% of encounters for upper respiratory infections. Better interpersonal skills scores were associated with a significant reduction in the odds of antibiotic prescribing (OR per score decile 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99), while greater proficiency in clinical skills and English proficiency were not. Female physicians, those practicing internal medicine compared to family medicine, those with citizenship from the US compared to all other countries, and those practicing in southern of the US were also more likely to prescribe potentially unnecessary antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, physicians with better interpersonal skills are less likely to prescribe antibiotics for acute sinusitis and upper respiratory infections. Future research should examine whether tailored interpersonal skills training to help physicians manage patient expectations for antibiotics could reduce unnecessary antibiotic prescribing.

Incidence and Variables Associated With Inconsistencies in Opioid Prescribing at Hospital Discharge and Its Associated Adverse Drug Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Opioid-related medication errors (MEs) can have a significant impact on patient health and contribute to opioid misuse. The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of and variables associated with the receipt of an opioid prescription and opioid-related MEs (omissions, duplications, or dose changes) at hospital discharge. We also determined rates of adverse drug events and risks of emergency department visits, readmissions, or death 30 days and 90 days post discharge associated with MEs. METHODS: A cohort of hospitalized patients discharged from the McGill University Health Centre between 2014 and 2016 was assembled. The impact of opioid-related MEs was assessed in a propensity score-adjusted logistic regression models. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine characteristics associated with MEs and discharge opioid prescription. RESULTS: A total of 1530 (43.9%) of 3486 patients were prescribed opioids, of which 13.4% (n = 205) of patients had at least 1 opioid-related ME. Rates of MEs were higher in handwritten prescriptions compared to the electronic reconciliation discharge prescription group (20.6% vs 1.2%). Computer-based prescriptions were associated with a 69% lower risk of opioid-related MEs (adjusted odds ratio: 0.31, 95% confidence interval: 0.14-0.65) as well as 63% lower risk of receiving an opioid prescription. Opioid-related MEs were associated with a 2.3 times increased risk of healthcare utilization in the 30 days postdischarge period (adjusted odds ratio: 2.32, 95% confidence interval: 1.24-4.32). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid-related MEs are common in handwritten discharge prescriptions. Our findings highlight the need for computer-based prescribing platforms and careful review of medications during critical periods of care such as hospital transitions.

Effect of an Electronic Medication Reconciliation Intervention on Adverse Drug Events: A Cluster Randomized Trial.

Importance: Adverse drug events (ADEs) account for up to 16% of emergency department (ED) visits and 7% of hospital admissions. Medication reconciliation is required for hospital accreditation because it can reduce medication discrepancies, but there is no evidence that reducing discrepancies reduces ADEs or other adverse outcomes. Objective: To evaluate whether electronic medication reconciliation reduces ADEs, medication discrepancies, and other adverse outcomes compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized trial involved 3491 patients who were discharged from 2 medical units and 2 surgical units at the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, between October 2014 and November 2016. Data analysis took place from July 2017 to July 2019. Intervention: The RightRx intervention electronically retrieved community drugs from the provincial insurer and aligned them with in-hospital drugs to facilitate reconciliation and communication at care transitions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ADEs in 30 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes included medication discrepancies, ED visits, hospital readmissions, and a composite outcome of ED visits, readmissions, and death up to 90 days after discharge. Results: Of 4656 eligible patients, 3567 (76.6%) consented to participate (2060 [57.8%] men; mean [SD] age, 69.8 [14.9] years). Overall, 76 patients died during the hospital stay, so 3491 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the risk of ADEs between intervention and control groups (76 [4.6%] vs 73 [4.0%]; OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.33-1.48), ED visits (433 [26.2%] vs 488 [26.6%]; OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.36-1.42), hospital readmission (170 [10.3%] vs 261 [14.2%]; OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.06-1.14), or the composite outcome (447 [27.0%] vs 506 [27.6%]; OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.34-1.27) at 30 days. Medication discrepancies were significantly reduced in the intervention group compared with the control group (437 [26.4%] vs 1029 [56.0%]; OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.12-0.57). Changes made to community medications (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10) and new medications (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.18) were significant risk factors for ADEs. Conclusions and Relevance: Electronic medication reconciliation reduced medication discrepancies but did not reduce ADEs or other adverse outcomes. Hospital accreditation should focus on interventions that reduce the risk of adverse events for patients with multiple changes to community medications. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01179867.

What is in your wallet? A cluster randomized trial of the effects of showing comparative patient out-of-pocket costs on primary care prescribing for uncomplicated hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Drug expenditures are responsible for an increasing proportion of health costs, accounting for $1.1 trillion in annual expenditure worldwide. As hundreds of billions of dollars are being spent each year on overtreatment with prescribed medications that are either unnecessary or are in excess of lowest cost-effective therapy, programs are needed that optimize fiscally appropriate use. We evaluated whether providing physicians with information on the patient out-of-pocket payment consequences of prescribing decisions that were in excess of lowest cost-effective therapy would alter prescribing decisions using the treatment of uncomplicated hypertension as an exemplar. METHODS: A single-blind cluster randomized trial was conducted over a 60-month follow-up period in 76 primary care physicians in Quebec, Canada, and their patients with uncomplicated hypertension who were using the MOXXI integrated electronic health record for drug and health problem management. Physicians were randomized to an out-of-pocket expenditure module that provided alerts for comparative out-of-payment costs, thiazide diuretics as recommended first-line therapy, and tools to monitor blood pressure targets and medication compliance, or alternatively the basic MOXXI system. System software and prescription claims were used to analyze the impact of the intervention on treatment choice, adherence, and overall and out-of-pocket payment costs using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Three thousand five-hundred ninety-two eligible patients with uncomplicated hypertension were enrolled, of whom 1261 (35.1%) were newly started (incident patient) on treatment during follow-up. There was a statistically significant increase in the prescription of diuretics in the newly treated intervention (26.6%) compared to control patients (19.8%) (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.33). For patients already treated (prevalent patient), there was a statistically significant interaction between the intervention and patient age, with older patients being less likely to be switched to a diuretic. Among the incident patients, physicians with less than 15 years of experience were much more likely to prescribe a diuretic (OR 10.69; 95% CI 1.49 to 76.64) than physicians with 15 to 25 years (OR 0.67; 95%CI 0.25 to 1.78), or more than 25 years of experience (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.65). There was no statistically significant effect of the intervention on adherence or out-of-pocket payment cost. CONCLUSIONS: The provision of comparative information on patient out-of-pocket payments for treatment of uncomplicated hypertension had a statistically significant impact on increasing the initiation of diuretics in incident patients and switching to diuretics in younger prevalent patients. The impact of interventions to improve the cost-effectiveness of prescribing may be enhanced by also targeting patients with tools to participate in treatment decision-making and by providing physicians with comparative out-of-pocket information on all evidence-based alternatives that would enhance clinical decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN96253624.

Improving patient safety and efficiency of medication reconciliation through the development and adoption of a computer-assisted tool with automated electronic integration of population-based community drug data: the RightRx project.

Background and Objective: Many countries require hospitals to implement medication reconciliation for accreditation, but the process is resource-intensive, thus adherence is poor. We report on the impact of prepopulating and aligning community and hospital drug lists with data from population-based and hospital-based drug information systems to reduce workload and enhance adoption and use of an e-medication reconciliation application, RightRx. Methods: The prototype e-medical reconciliation web-based software was developed for a cluster-randomized trial at the McGill University Health Centre. User-centered design and agile development processes were used to develop features intended to enhance adoption, safety, and efficiency. RightRx was implemented in medical and surgical wards, with support and training provided by unit champions and field staff. The time spent per professional using RightRx was measured, as well as the medication reconciliation completion rates in the intervention and control units during the first 20 months of the trial. Results: Users identified required modifications to the application, including the need for dose-based prescribing, the role of the discharge physician in prescribing community-based medication, and access to the rationale for medication decisions made during hospitalization. In the intervention units, both physicians and pharmacists were involved in discharge reconciliation, for 96.1% and 71.9% of patients, respectively. Medication reconciliation was completed for 80.7% (surgery) to 96.0% (medicine) of patients in the intervention units, and 0.7% (surgery) to 82.7% of patients in the control units. The odds of completing medication reconciliation were 9 times greater in the intervention compared to control units (odds ratio: 9.0, 95% confidence interval, 7.4-10.9, P < .0001) after adjusting for differences in patient characteristics. Conclusion: High rates of medication reconciliation completion were achieved with automated prepopulation and alignment of community and hospital medication lists.

Evaluating the impact of an integrated computer-based decision support with person-centered analytics for the management of asthma in primary care: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Computer-based decision support has been effective in providing alerts for preventive care. Our objective was to determine whether a personalized asthma management computer-based decision support increases the quality of asthma management and reduces the rate of out-of-control episodes. METHODS: A cluster-randomized trial was conducted in Quebec, Canada among 81 primary care physicians and 4447 of their asthmatic patients. Patients were followed from the first visit for 3-33 months. The physician control group used the Medical Office of the 21st century (MOXXI) system, an integrated electronic health record. A custom-developed asthma decision support system was integrated within MOXXI and was activated for physicians in the intervention group. RESULTS: At the first visit, 9.8% (intervention) to 12.9% (control) of patients had out-of-control asthma, which was defined as a patient having had an emergency room visit or hospitalization for respiratory-related problems and/or more than 250 doses of fast-acting ß-agonist (FABA) dispensed in the past 3 months. By the end of the trial, there was a significant increase in the ratio of doses of inhaled corticosteroid use to fast-acting ß-agonist (0.93 vs. 0.69: difference: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.02-0.51; P = 0.03) in the intervention group. The overall out-of-control asthma rate was 54.7 (control) and 46.2 (intervention) per 100 patients per year (100 PY), a non-significant rate difference of -8.7 (95% CI: -24.7, 7.3; P = 0.29). The intervention's effect was greater for patients with out-of-control asthma at the beginning of the study, a group who accounted for 44.7% of the 5597 out-of-control asthma events during follow-up, as there was a reduction in the event rate of -28.4 per 100 PY (95% CI: -55.6, -1.2; P = 0.04) compared to patients with in-control asthma at the beginning of the study (-0.08 [95% CI: -10.3, 8.6; P = 0.86]). DISCUSSION: This study evaluated the effectiveness of a novel computer-assisted ADS system that facilitates systematic monitoring of asthma control status, follow-up of patients with out of control asthma, and evidence-based, patient-specific treatment recommendations. We found that physicians were more likely to use ADS for out-of-control patients, that in the majority of these patients, they were advised to add an inhaled corticosteroid or a leukotriene inhibitor to the patient s treatment regimen, and the intervention significantly increased the mean ratio of inhaled corticosteroids to FABA during follow-up. It also reduced the rate of out-of-control episodes during follow up among patients whose asthma was out-of-control at the time of study entry. Future research should assess whether coupling patient-specific treatment recommendations, automated follow-up, and home care with comparative feedback on quality and outcomes of care can improve guideline adoption and care outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: A primary care-personalized asthma management system reduced the rate of out-of-control asthma episodes among patients whose asthma was poorly controlled at the study's onset.

Estimating the information gap between emergency department records of community medication compared to on-line access to the community-based pharmacy records.

OBJECTIVE: Errors in community medication histories increase the risk of adverse events. The objectives of this study were to estimate the extent to which access to community-based pharmacy records provided more information about prescription drug use than conventional medication histories. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients with public drug insurance who visited the emergency departments (ED) in two teaching hospitals in Montreal, Quebec was recruited. Drug lists recorded in the patients' ED charts were compared with pharmacy records of dispensed medications retrieved from the public drug insurer. Patient and drug-related predictors of discrepancies were estimated using general estimating equation multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: 613 patients participated in the study (mean age 63.1 years, 59.2% women). Pharmacy records identified 41.5% more prescribed medications than were noted in the ED chart. Concordance was highest for anticoagulants, cardiovascular drugs and diuretics. Omissions in the ED chart were more common for drugs that may be taken episodically. Patients with more than 12 medications (OR 2.92, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.97) and more than one pharmacy (OR 3.85, 95% CI 1.80 to 6.59) were more likely to have omissions in the ED chart. DISCUSSION: The development of health information exchanges could improve the efficiency and accuracy of information about community medication histories if they enable automated access to dispensed medication records from community pharmacies, particularly for the most vulnerable populations with multiple morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy records identified a substantial number of medications that were not in the ED chart. There is potential for greater safety and efficiency with automated access to pharmacy records.