Potentially inappropriate medications in elderly ambulatory and institutionalized patients: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: The elderly are frequently exposed to drug related problems causing hospitalizations and increased costs of care. Information about Romanian prescribing practices among the elderly and potential medication associated- risks is lacking. The objective of this study was to identify and compare the most frequent potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) recommended to ambulatory and institutionalized Romanian elderly, through an observational retrospective design. METHODS: All reimbursed medications prescribed to a sample of ambulatory elderly accessing two community pharmacies and all medications recommended to a group of institutionalized elderly (urban facilities, Romania, same month) were analyzed. The STOPP/START criteria and the PRISCUS list were used for PIM identification and for classification as misprescribed, underprescribed or overprescribed -subtypes. RESULTS: The analysis involved 345 prescriptions recommended to ambulatory elderly and 91 medical files available for the institutionalized patients. The ambulatory elderly had a mean age of 74.8 years old and were daily exposed to a median number of 3 prescribed medications. The institutionalized elderly were older (mean age 80.77) received 8 medications daily and 69 % of them were functionally dependent. Cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric indications were the most frequent: 64.34 % and 18.55 % of the ambulatory prescriptions, 93.40 % and 41.75 % of the institutionalized patients' medical files. 159 PIM were identified on 34.49 % of the ambulatory prescriptions. 82.41 % of the institutionalized patients' medical files contained 140 PIM. The potential underprescribing of cardiovascular therapies was the most frequent PIM category on the ambulatory prescriptions (55.34 % of all PIM), while for the institutionalized patients' medical files, the misprescribed and overprescribed PIM were those predominantly represented (62.14 % and 27.14 % of all PIM). In both subgroups of data, NSAIDs (56.66 % of ambulatory prescriptions and 35.63 % of institutionalized patients' data) and benzodiazepines (26.66 % of ambulatory prescriptions and 24.13 % of institutionalized patient's data) were predominantly misprescribed. Anticholinergics were rarely used (0.62 % of total PIM from ambulatory prescriptions, 2.14 % of total PIM from institutionalized patients' data). CONCLUSIONS: The PIM identified in both elderly groups suggested potential risks for the occurrence of adverse events specific to the elderly population. Larger studies, both observational and interventional, are needed to ensure a safer therapeutic approach.

Description of a systematic pharmaceutical care approach intended to increase the appropriateness of medication use by elderly patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The pharmaceutical care practice represents a model of responsible pharmacist involvement in the pharmacotherapy optimization of various population groups, including the elderly, known to be at risk for drug-related problems. Romanian pharmacists could use validated pharmaceutical care experiences to confirm their role as health-care professionals. This descriptive research presents the application in two real and different environments of practice of a structured pharmaceutical care approach conceived as the basis for a medication review activity and aiming at the identification and resolution of the drug related problems in the elderly. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two patients with similar degree of disease-burden complexity, receiving care in different health-care environments (The Geriatric Ward of the Royal Victoria Hospital from the McGill University Health Centre in Montréal, Québec, Canada, in November 2010, and an urban nursing-home facility in Cluj-Napoca, Romania, in March 2011), were chosen for the analysis. One clinical pharmacist suggested solutions for the management of each of the active drug-related problems identified, using the systematic pharmaceutical care approach and specific published geriatric pharmacotherapy recommendations. The number of the drug-related problems identified and the degree of the care-team acceptance of the pharmacists' solutions were noted for each patient. RESULTS: The pharmacist found 6 active drug-related problems for the hospitalized patient (72 year-old, Chronic Disease Score 9) and 7 potential ones for the nursing-home resident (79 year-old, Chronic Disease Score 8), involving misuse, underuse and overuse of medications. Each patient had 3 geriatric syndromes at baseline. The therapy changes suggested by the pharmacist were implemented for the hospitalized patient, through collaboration with the health-care team. For the nursing home resident, the pharmacist identified the need for additional 6 medications and safety and efficacy arguments to cease 7 initial therapies, simplifying the therapeutic daily schedule (from 24 daily doses to 15). CONCLUSION: The pharmacist's potential contribution to the optimization of the Romanian elderly patients' pharmacotherapy needs further exploration, as potential drug related problems reported as characteristic for this population were easily identified. The presented structured and validated model of pharmaceutical care approach could be used to this end. Its dissemination and use could be encouraged along with the enhancement of pharmacotherapy information and care team collaboration skills.