A mixed methods analysis of the medication review intervention centered around the use of the 'Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing' Assistant (STRIPA) in Swiss primary care practices.

BACKGROUND: Electronic clinical decision support systems (eCDSS), such as the 'Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing' Assistant (STRIPA), have become promising tools for assisting general practitioners (GPs) with conducting medication reviews in older adults. Little is known about how GPs perceive eCDSS-assisted recommendations for pharmacotherapy optimization. The aim of this study was to explore the implementation of a medication review intervention centered around STRIPA in the 'Optimising PharmacoTherapy In the multimorbid elderly in primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial. METHODS: We used an explanatory mixed methods design combining quantitative and qualitative data. First, quantitative data about the acceptance and implementation of eCDSS-generated recommendations from GPs (n = 21) and their patients (n = 160) in the OPTICA intervention group were collected. Then, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with GPs from the OPTICA intervention group (n = 8), and interview data were analyzed through thematic analysis. RESULTS: In quantitative findings, GPs reported averages of 13 min spent per patient preparing the eCDSS, 10 min performing medication reviews, and 5 min discussing prescribing recommendations with patients. On average, out of the mean generated 3.7 recommendations (SD=1.8). One recommendation to stop or start a medication was reported to be implemented per patient in the intervention group (SD=1.2). Overall, GPs found the STRIPA useful and acceptable. They particularly appreciated its ability to generate recommendations based on large amounts of patient information. During qualitative interviews, GPs reported the main reasons for limited implementation of STRIPA were related to problems with data sourcing (e.g., incomplete data imports), preparation of the eCDSS (e.g., time expenditure for updating and adapting information), its functionality (e.g., technical problems downloading PDF recommendation reports), and appropriateness of recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative findings help explain the relatively low implementation of recommendations demonstrated by quantitative findings, but also show GPs' overall acceptance of STRIPA. Our results provide crucial insights for adapting STRIPA to make it more suitable for regular use in future primary care settings (e.g., necessity to improve data imports). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03724539, date of first registration: 29/10/2018.

Does missing data matter in the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing questionnaire? A systematic review and two case analyses.

BACKGROUND: The revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire was developed to capture beliefs and perceptions of patients about deprescribing. In general, handling of missing data is underreported in survey studies. Underlying mechanisms related to missing data may impact the findings from survey studies. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the missing data in studies using the rPATD questionnaire through a systematic review and datasets from two studies. METHODS: First, this review updated a systematic review on the rPATD (and other versions). We searched Medline via OVID, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science until 31st January 2023. Missing data reporting and methods to handle them were collected. Second, data from two deprescribing studies were analyzed using three methods of missing data handling: complete case analysis, personal mean substitution, and multiple imputation. We compared the scores from each domain and the associations of the domains with two questions from the rPATD to highlight how using different methods can influence the interpretation of study findings. RESULTS: We identified 49 studies: 31 (63 %) from this study and 18 (37 %) from the original systematic review. The question or domain with the most missing data could be identified in 9 studies (18.4 %). Missing data management was reported in 19 studies (38.8 %). In one case analysis, the "Burden" domain was significantly associated with the question "I would like to try stopping one of my medicines to see how I feel without it" using complete case analysis (p = 0.044) or multiple imputation (p = 0.038), but not when using personal mean substitution (p = 0.057). CONCLUSIONS: Missing data and methods used to handle missing data were underreported in studies using the rPATD questionnaire. The methods should be chosen carefully as our analyses from two distinct studies suggest that they may impact the interpretation of the findings from the questionnaire.

Older adults' attitudes towards deprescribing and medication changes: a longitudinal sub-study of a cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between older patients' willingness to have one or more medications deprescribed and: (1) change in medications, (2) change in the appropriateness of medications and (3) implementation of prescribing recommendations generated by the electronic decision support system tested in the 'Optimising PharmacoTherapy In the Multimorbid Elderly in Primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial. DESIGN: A longitudinal sub-study of the OPTICA trial, a cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Swiss primary care settings. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were aged ≥65 years, with ≥3 chronic conditions and ≥5 regular medications recruited from 43 general practitioner (GP) practices. EXPOSURES: Patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed was assessed using three questions from the 'revised Patient Attitudes Towards Deprescribing' (rPATD) questionnaire and its concerns about stopping score. MEASURES/ANALYSES: Medication-related outcomes were collected at 1 year follow-up. Aim 1 outcome: change in the number of long-term medications between baseline and 12 month follow-up. Aim 2 outcome: change in medication appropriateness (Medication Appropriateness Index). Aim 3 outcome: binary variable on whether any prescribing recommendation generated during the OPTICA medication review was implemented. We used multilevel linear regression analyses (aim 1 and aim 2) and multilevel logistic regression analyses (aim 3). Models were adjusted for sociodemographic variables and the clustering effect at GP level. RESULTS: 298 patients completed the rPATD, 45% were women and 78 years was the median age. A statistically significant association was found between the concerns about stopping score and the change in the number of medications over time (per 1-unit increase in the score the average number of medications use was 0.65 higher; 95% CI: 0.08 to 1.22). Other than that we did not find evidence for statistically significant associations between patients' agreement with deprescribing and medication-related outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence for an association between most measures of patient agreement with deprescribing and medication-related outcomes over 1 year. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03724539.

The Patient Typology about deprescribing and medication-related decisions: A quantitative exploration.

This study aimed to test the adequacy of a quantitative measure of our qualitatively developed Patient Typology-categories of older adults' attitudes towards medicines and medicine decision-making-and identify characteristics associated with each Typology. We conducted secondary data analyses of a subset of survey item measures of adults (≥65 years) who were members of online survey panels in Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the Netherlands (n = 4688). Multinomial logistic regression analyses assessed associations between demographic, psychosocial and medication-related measures. Mean age was 71.5 (5), and 47.5% of participants were female. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of identifying with Typology 1 'Attached to medicines' over Typology 2 'Open to deprescribing' were higher positive attitude towards polypharmacy (RRR = 1.12, p = <0.001) and higher need for certainty (RRR = 1.11, p = 0.039). Factors associated with an increased likelihood of identifying with Typology 3 'Defers (medication decision-making) to others' over Typology 2 were older age (RRR = 1.47 per 10-year age increase, p = <0.001) and a decreased likelihood of prior deprescribing experience (RRR = 0.73, p = 0.033). This study provides validation of the Typology with large samples from four countries, with the quantitatively-measured typologies generally aligning with the qualitatively derived categories. Our Patient Typology measure provides a succinct way researchers can assess attitudes towards deprescribing.

Older adults' adherence to medications and willingness to deprescribe: A substudy of a randomized clinical trial.

Our study investigated the association between patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed and medication adherence. This longitudinal substudy of the 'Optimizing PharmacoTherapy In the Multimorbid Elderly in Primary CAre' (OPTICA) trial, a cluster randomized controlled trial, took place in Swiss primary care settings. Participants were aged ≥65 years and over, with ≥3 chronic conditions and ≥5 regular medications. At baseline, the 'revised Patient Attitudes Towards Deprescribing' (rPATD) questionnaire was measured. The A14-scale measured adherence (self-report) at the 12-month follow-up. Multilevel linear regression analyses adjusted for baseline variables were performed. Of the 298 participants, 45% were women, and the median age was 78. Participants reported a high level of adherence and willingness to have medications deprescribed. We did not find evidence for an association between patients' willingness to deprescribe and medication adherence. Further research is needed to explore the relationship between these concepts and to inform collaborative decisions about medicines in the context of polypharmacy.

Association of low blood pressure and falls: An analysis of data from the Leiden 85-plus Study.

BACKGROUND: Falls and consequent injuries are prevalent in older adults. In this group, half of injury-related hospitalizations are associated with falls and the rate of falls increases with age. The evidence on the role of blood pressure and the use of antihypertensive treatment on the risk of falls remains unclear in oldest-old adults (≥85 years). OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and incident falls with medical consequences in oldest-old adults and to analyse whether this association is modified by the use of antihypertensive treatments or the presence of cardiovascular disease. METHODS: We analysed data from the Leiden 85-plus Study, a prospective, population-based cohort study with adults aged ≥85 years and a 5-year follow-up. Falls with medical consequences were reported by the treating physician of participants. We assessed the association between time-updated systolic blood pressure and the risk of falling over a follow-up period of five years using generalized linear mixed effects models with a binomial distribution and a logit link function. Subgroup analyses were performed to examine the role of antihypertensive treatment and the difference between participant with and without cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: We analysed data from 544 oldest-old adults, 242 (44.4%) of which used antihypertensives. In 81 individuals (15%) ≥1 fall(s) were reported during the follow-up period. The odds for a fall decreased by a factor of 0.86 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.93) for each increase in blood pressure by 10 mmHg. This effect was specific to blood pressure values above 130mmHg. We did not find any evidence that the effect would be modified by antihypertensive treatment, but that there was a tendency that it would be weaker in participants with cardiovascular disease (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.90 per 10mmHg) compared to those without cardiovascular disease (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.05 per 10mmHg). CONCLUSION: Our results point towards a possible benefit of higher blood pressure in the oldest-old with respect to falls independent of the use of antihypertensive treatments.

Changes in Healthcare Utilization During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Potential Causes-A Cohort Study From Switzerland.

Objectives: To describe the frequency of and reasons for changes in healthcare utilization in those requiring ongoing treatment, and to assess characteristics associated with change, during the second wave of the pandemic. Methods: Corona Immunitas e-cohort study (age ≥20 years) participants completed monthly questionnaires. We compared participants reporting a change in healthcare utilization with those who did not using descriptive and bivariate statistics. We explored characteristics associated with the number of changes using negative binomial regression. Results: The study included 3,190 participants from nine research sites. One-fifth reported requiring regular treatment. Among these, 14% reported a change in healthcare utilization, defined as events in which participants reported that they changed their ongoing treatment, irrespective of the reason. Reasons for change were medication changes and side-effects, specifically for hypertension, or pulmonary embolism treatment. Females were more likely to report changes [Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) = 2.15, p = 0.002]. Those with hypertension were least likely to report changes [IRR = 0.35, p = 0.019]. Conclusion: Few of those requiring regular treatment reported changes in healthcare utilization. Continuity of care for females and chronic diseases besides hypertension must be emphasized.

Inappropriate proton-pump inhibitor prescribing in primary care - an observational study with quality circles.

INTRODUCTION: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) should be deprescribed when an indication is lacking or the dose is too high. Academic and media reports have tried to raise awareness and thereby reduce the inappropriate prescribing of PPIs. However, pharmacoepidemiologic studies have shown an unchanged frequency of such inappropriate prescribing over time. Little is known about whether or how general practitioners (GPs) adapt their prescribing practices once their awareness of inappropriate PPI prescribing has been raised. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing (too high dose or no indication) in a consecutive sample of patients in Swiss primary care settings. Our goal was then to evaluate how GPs managed the patients with potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing over 12 months after flagging these patients. METHODS: In this observational study, 11 GPs from the canton of Bern in Switzerland used their medical records to identify 20 patients who had been prescribed a PPI for ≥8 weeks and flagged potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing in their records. After 12 months, we asked the same GPs whether the PPI prescriptions of those patients had changed and, if so, how. RESULTS: Of 1,376 patients consecutively screened, 206 (15%) had been prescribed a PPI for ≥8 weeks. Of these 206 patients, 85 (41%) had a potentially inappropriate PPI prescription. Of these 85 patients, 55 (65%) had no indication for PPI, and 30 (35%) had a too-high dose. After one year, only 29 (35%) of the 84 flagged potentially inappropriate PPIs were stopped or reduced. The most frequently mentioned reasons that deprescribing was not possible were a lack of discussion with the patient (no contact or no time), the presence of symptoms requiring the PPI, or the unwillingness of the patient to deprescribe. CONCLUSION: In the Swiss primary care setting, the rate of potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing is high. Having GPs flag potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing did not result in PPI deprescribing in most patients over 12 months. Our findings suggest that more personalised and targeted interventions are necessary to successfully implement the deprescribing of potentially inappropriate PPIs. We see the need to co-design interventions with patients and providers and test behavioural change techniques to enable the deprescribing of inappropriate PPIs.

Optimising prescribing in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in primary care (OPTICA): cluster randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effects of a primary care medication review intervention centred around an electronic clinical decision support system (eCDSS) on appropriateness of medication and the number of prescribing omissions in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy compared with a discussion about medication in line with usual care. DESIGN: Cluster randomised clinical trial. SETTING: Swiss primary care, between December 2018 and February 2021. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients were ≥65 years of age with three or more chronic conditions and five or more long term medications. INTERVENTION: The intervention to optimise pharmacotherapy centred around an eCDSS was conducted by general practitioners, followed by shared decision making between general practitioners and patients, and was compared with a discussion about medication in line with usual care between patients and general practitioners. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were improvement in the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and the Assessment of Underutilisation (AOU) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included number of medications, falls, fractures, and quality of life. RESULTS: In 43 general practitioner clusters, 323 patients were recruited (median age 77 (interquartile range 73-83) years; 45% (n=146) women). Twenty one general practitioners with 160 patients were assigned to the intervention group and 22 general practitioners with 163 patients to the control group. On average, one recommendation to stop or start a medication was reported to be implemented per patient. At 12 months, the results of the intention-to-treat analysis of the improvement in appropriateness of medication (odds ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.87) and the number of prescribing omissions (0.90, 0.41 to 1.96) were inconclusive. The same was the case for the per protocol analysis. No clear evidence was found for a difference in safety outcomes at the 12 month follow-up, but fewer safety events were reported in the intervention group than in the control group at six and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomised trial of general practitioners and older adults, the results were inconclusive as to whether the medication review intervention centred around the use of an eCDSS led to an improvement in appropriateness of medication or a reduction in prescribing omissions at 12 months compared with a discussion about medication in line with usual care. Nevertheless, the intervention could be safely delivered without causing any harm to patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03724539Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03724539.

Healthcare Costs and Health-Related Quality of Life in Older Multimorbid Patients After Hospitalization.

Objectives: We identified factors associated with healthcare costs and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of multimorbid older adults with polypharmacy. Methods: Using data from the OPERAM (OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in the Multimorbid older people) trial, we described the magnitude and composition of healthcare costs, and time trends of HRQoL, during 1-year after an acute-care hospitalization. We performed a cluster analysis to identify groups with different cost and HRQoL trends. Using multilevel models, we also identified factors associated with costs and HRQoL. Results: Two months after hospitalization monthly mean costs peaked (CHF 7'124) and HRQoL was highest (0.67). They both decreased thereafter. Age, falls, and comorbidities were associated with higher 1-year costs. Being female and housebound were negatively associated with HRQoL, while moderate alcohol consumption had a positive association. Being independent in daily activities was associated with lower costs and higher HRQoL. Conclusion: Although only some identified potential influences on costs and HRQoL are modifiable, our observations support the importance of prevention before health deterioration in older people with multimorbid illness and associated polypharmacy.

Broken bones and apple brandy: resilience and sensemaking of general practitioners and their at-risk patients during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland.

In early 2020, when the first COVID-19 cases were confirmed in Switzerland, the federal government started implementing measures such as national stay-at-home recommendations and a strict limitation of health care services use. General practitioners (GPs) and their at-risk patients faced similar uncertainties and grappled with subsequent sensemaking of the unprecedented situation. Qualitative interviews with 24 GPs and 37 at-risk patients were conducted which were analyzed using thematic analysis. Weick's (1993) four sources of -resilience - improvisation, virtual role systems, attitudes of wisdom and respectful interaction - heuristically guide the exploration of on-the-ground experiences and informal ways GPs and their at-risk patients sought to ensure continuity of primary care. GPs used their metaphorical Swiss army knives of learned tools as well as existing knowledge and relationships to adapt to the extenuating circumstances. Through improvisation, GPs and patients found pragmatic solutions, such as using local farmer apple brandy as disinfectant or at-home treatments of clavicle fractures. Through virtual role systems, GPs and patients came to terms with new and shifting roles, such as "good soldier" and "at-risk patient" categorizations. Both parties adopted attitudes of wisdom by accepting that they could not know everything. They also diversified their sources of information through personal relationships, formal networks, and the internet. The GP-patient relationship grew in importance through respectful interaction, and intersubjective reflection helped make sense of shifting roles and ambiguous guidelines. The empirical analysis of this paper contributes to theoretical considerations of sensemaking, resilience, crisis settings and health systems.

Understanding older patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed in primary care: a protocol for a cross-sectional survey study in nine European countries.

INTRODUCTION: To reduce inappropriate polypharmacy, deprescribing should be part of patients' regular care. Yet deprescribing is difficult to implement, as shown in several studies. Understanding patients' attitudes towards deprescribing at the individual and country level may reveal effective ways to involve older adults in decisions about medications and help to implement deprescribing in primary care settings. In this study we aim to investigate older adults' perceptions and views on deprescribing in different European countries. Specific objectives are to investigate the patients' willingness to have medications deprescribed by medication type and to have herbal or dietary supplements reduced or stopped, the role of the Patient Typology (on medication perspectives), and the impact of the patient-GP relationship in these decisions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This cross-sectional survey study has two parts: Part A and Part B. Data collection for Part A will take place in nine countries, in which per country 10 GPs will recruit 10 older patients (≥65 years old) each (n = 900). Part B will be conducted in Switzerland only, in which an additional 35 GPs will recruit five patients each and respond to a questionnaire themselves, with questions about the patients' medications, their willingness to deprescribe those, and their patient-provider relationship. For both Part A and part B, a questionnaire will be used to assess the willingness of older patients with polypharmacy to have medications deprescribed and other relevant information. For Part B, this same questionnaire will have additional questions on the use of herbal and dietary supplements. DISCUSSION: The international study design will allow comparisons of patient perspectives on deprescribing from different countries. We will collect information about willingness to have medications deprescribed by medication type and regarding herbal and dietary supplements, which adds important information to the literature on patients' preferences. In addition, GPs in Switzerland will also be surveyed, allowing us to compare GPs' and patients' views and preferences on stopping or reducing specific medications. Our findings will help to understand patients' attitudes towards deprescribing, contributing to improvements in the design and implementation of deprescribing interventions that are better tailored to patients' preferences.

Detectability of Medication Errors With a STOPP/START-Based Medication Review in Older People Prior to a Potentially Preventable Drug-Related Hospital Admission.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are risk factors for drug-related hospital admissions (DRAs) in the ageing population. DRAs caused by medication errors (MEs) are considered potentially preventable. The STOPP/START criteria were developed to detect potential MEs in older people. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the detectability of MEs with a STOPP/START-based in-hospital medication review in older people with polypharmacy and multimorbidity prior to a potentially preventable DRA. METHODS: Hospitalised older patients (n = 963) with polypharmacy and multimorbidity from the intervention arm of the OPERAM trial received a STOPP/START-based in-hospital medication review by a pharmacotherapy team. Readmissions within 1 year after the in-hospital medication review were adjudicated for drug-relatedness. A retrospective assessment was performed to determine whether MEs identified at the first DRA were detectable during the in-hospital medication review. RESULTS: In total, 84 of 963 OPERAM intervention patients (8.7%) were readmitted with a potentially preventable DRA, of which 72 patients (n = 77 MEs) were eligible for analysis. About half (48%, n = 37/77) of the MEs were not present during the in-hospital medication review and therefore were not detectable at that time. The pharmacotherapy team recommended a change in medication regimen in 50% (n = 20/40) of present MEs, which corresponds to 26% (n = 20/77) of the total identified MEs at readmission. However, these recommendations were not implemented. CONCLUSION: MEs identified at readmission were not addressed by a prior single in-hospital medication review because either these MEs occurred after the medication review (~50%), or no recommendation was given during the medication review (~25%), or the recommendation was not implemented (~25%). Future research should focus on optimisation of the timing and frequency of medication review and the implementation of proposed medication recommendations. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02986425. December 8, 2016. FUNDING: European Union HORIZON 2020, Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF).

Life-course socioeconomic conditions, multimorbidity and polypharmacy in older adults: A retrospective cohort study.

Socioeconomic conditions across the life course may contribute to differences in multimorbidity and polypharmacy in old age. However, whether the risk of multimorbidity changes during ageing and whether life-course socioeconomic conditions are associated with polypharmacy remain unclear. We investigated whether disadvantaged childhood socioeconomic conditions (CSCs) predict increased odds of multimorbidity and polypharmacy in older adults, whether CSCs remain associated when adjusting for adulthood socioeconomic conditions (ACSs), and whether CSCs and ACSs are associated cumulatively over the life course. We used data for 31,432 participants (multimorbidity cohort, mean [SD] age 66·2[9] years), and 21,794 participants (polypharmacy cohort, mean age 69·0[8.9] years) from the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (age range 50-96 years). We used mixed-effects logistic regression to assess the associations of CSCs, ASCs, and a life-course socioeconomic conditions score (0-8; 8, most advantaged) with multimorbidity (≥2 chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs taken daily). We found an association between CSCs and multimorbidity (reference: most disadvantaged; disadvantaged: odds ratio (OR) = 0·79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0·70-0·90; middle: OR = 0·60; 95%CI 0·53-0·68; advantaged: OR = 0·52, 95%CI 0·45-0·60, most advantaged: OR = 0·40, 95%CI 0·34-0·48) but not polypharmacy. This multimorbidity association was attenuated but remained significant after adjusting for ASCs. The life-course socioeconomic conditions score was associated with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. We did not find an association between CSCs, life-course socioeconomic conditions, and change in odds of multimorbidity and polypharmacy with ageing. Exposure to disadvantaged socioeconomic conditions in childhood or over the entire life-course could predict multimorbidity in older age.

Quality of chronic care for patients with type 2 diabetes in practices with and without a Clinical Specialized Medical Assistant (CSMA) - a cross-sectional study from Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Due to Switzerland's shortage of general practitioners (GPs), task shifting through interprofessional collaboration is needed to relieve GPs' workload and allow the continued provision of quality care. The profession of specialized medical assistant (SMA) was created in Switzerland several years ago to provide a career advancement opportunity for medical practice assistants (MPAs) and intended to counteract the increasing scarcity of resources in primary care. Clinical specialized medical assistants (CSMAs) are trained to care for a set of chronic conditions, such as diabetes. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the quality of care for patients with type 2 diabetes in practices with and without CSMAs. Further, we aimed to investigate whether evidence exists that CSMA care models may allow for task shifting and the provision of interprofessional care while maintaining a high quality of care and to assess patient experiences with diabetes care in both care models. METHODS: The present study was a paper-based cross-sectional survey of patient data. A total of 171 patients with type 2 diabetes who had been under the care of either a GP with CSMA (91 patients) or a GP without CSMA (80 patients) for at least one year were consecutively recruited for the study. Data were collected from mid-September 2020 to mid-June 2021. For the statistical analyses, we used descriptive statistics and t-tests. RESULTS: Patients from both practice types were comparable in age, gender and diabetes-relevant factors such as Body Mass Index, smoking status and blood pressure. Overall, patients in both models received a high quality of care (Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire, DTSQ >32/36 points, SGED >75 points) and a low treatment burden (Treatment Burden Questionnaire, TBQ <20/150 points). When comparing patients' DTSQ, SGED and TBQ in both groups, we found no significant differences in diabetes-specific satisfaction (32.1 [SD 3.6] vs. 32.4 [SD 3.8], p = 0.7), SGED score (80.2 [SD 8.5] vs. 75.9 [SD 4.8], p = 0.18) or treatment burden (19.2 [SD 15.6] vs. 18.8 [SD 21.4], p = 0.89). CONCLUSION: Our comparison of patient-reported outcomes and SGED criteria of patients with type 2 diabetes in practices with and without CSMAs showed an equally high quality of care and a low treatment burden. More research is needed on the long-term effects and benefits of the care provided by CSMAs and which other tasks could be shifted to CSMAs to reduce the burden on GPs in the future. At the same time, an increasing number of patients with type 2 diabetes will require high-quality primary care.

Megatrends in Healthcare: Review for the Swiss National Science Foundation's National Research Programme 74 (NRP74) "Smarter Health Care".

Objectives: In this paper, we present a review of some relevant megatrends in healthcare conducted as part of the Swiss National Science Foundation's National Research Programme 74 (NRP74) "Smarter Health Care." Our aim is to stimulate discussions about long-term tendencies underlying the current and future development of the healthcare system. Methods: Our team-a multidisciplinary panel of researchers involved in the NRP74-went through an iterative process of internal consultations followed by a rapid literature review with the goal of reaching group consensus concerning the most relevant megatrends in healthcare. Results: Five megatrends were identified, namely: 1) Socio-demographic shifts. 2) Broadening meaning of "health." 3) Empowered patients and service users. 4) Digitalization in healthcare. 5) Emergence of new models of care. The main features of each megatrend are presented, drawing often on the situation in Switzerland as a paradigmatic example and adding reflections on the potential influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on them. Conclusion: Considering the long-term megatrends affecting the evolution of healthcare is important-amongst other things-to understand and contextualise the relevance and implications of innovative health services research results.

Cost-effectiveness of a structured medication review approach for multimorbid older adults: Within-trial analysis of the OPERAM study.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate polypharmacy has been linked with adverse outcomes in older, multimorbid adults. OPERAM is a European cluster-randomized trial aimed at testing the effect of a structured pharmacotherapy optimization intervention on preventable drug-related hospital admissions in multimorbid adults with polypharmacy aged 70 years or older. Clinical results of the trial showed a pattern of reduced drug-related hospital admissions, but without statistical significance. In this study we assessed the cost-effectiveness of the pharmacotherapy optimisation intervention. METHODS: We performed a pre-planned within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of the OPERAM intervention, from a healthcare system perspective. All data were collected within the trial apart from unit costs. QALYs were computed by applying the crosswalk German valuation algorithm to EQ-5D-5L-based quality of life data. Considering the clustered structure of the data and between-country heterogeneity, we applied Generalized Structural Equation Models (GSEMs) on a multiple imputed sample to estimate costs and QALYs. We also performed analyses by country and subgroup analyses by patient and morbidity characteristics. RESULTS: Trial-wide, the intervention was numerically dominant, with a potential cost-saving of CHF 3'588 (95% confidence interval (CI): -7'716; 540) and gain of 0.025 QALYs (CI: -0.002; 0.052) per patient. Robustness analyses confirmed the validity of the GSEM model. Subgroup analyses suggested stronger effects in people at higher risk. CONCLUSION: We observed a pattern towards dominance, potentially resulting from an accumulation of multiple small positive intervention effects. Our methodological approaches may inform other CEAs of multi-country, cluster-randomized trials facing presence of missing values and heterogeneity between centres/countries.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the continuity of care for at-risk patients in Swiss primary care settings: A mixed-methods study.

Continuity of care is important for the health of aging individuals with comorbidities. When initial coronavirus mitigation campaigns involved messaging such as "Stay at home-stay safe," and banned provision of non-urgent care, at-risk patients depending upon regular consultations with general practitioners (GPs) faced confusion about the possibility of seeking non-COVID-19 related healthcare. We employed a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, consisting of a quantitative component followed by a qualitative component, to understand at-risk patients' health services use during the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland. Quantitatively, we used electronic medical records data from 272 GPs and 266,796 patients. Based on pre-pandemic data, we predicted weekly consultation counts as well as weekly measurement counts (blood pressure, glycated hemoglobin, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) per 100 patients that would be expected in 2020 in absence of a pandemic and compared those to actual observed values. Qualitatively, we conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with 24 GPs (∼45 min) and 37 interviews with at-risk patients (∼35 min). Quantitative results demonstrate a significant decrease in consultation and measurement counts during the first shutdown period, with consultation counts quickly returning to normal and moving within expected values for the rest of 2020. Qualitative data contextualize these findings with GPs describing constantly implementing material, administrative, and communication changes. GPs reported communication gaps with the authorities and noted a lack of clear guidelines delineating how to define "at-risk patients" and what cases were "urgent" to treat during shutdowns. Patient interviews show that patient-level factors, such as fear of contracting coronavirus, perceptions that GPs were overburdened, and a sense of solidarity, influenced patients' decisions to consult less at the beginning of the pandemic. Findings demonstrate communication gaps during pandemic periods and provide valuable lessons for future pandemic preparedness, particularly the need for contingency plans for the overall healthcare system instead of plans focusing only on the infectious agent itself.

Frequency and Acceptance of Clinical Decision Support System-Generated STOPP/START Signals for Hospitalised Older Patients with Polypharmacy and Multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND: The Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) instrument is used to evaluate the appropriateness of medication in older people. STOPP/START criteria have been converted into software algorithms and implemented in a clinical decision support system (CDSS) to facilitate their use in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to determine the frequency of CDSS-generated STOPP/START signals and their subsequent acceptance by a pharmacotherapy team in a hospital setting. DESIGN AND METHODS: Hospitalised older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity allocated to the intervention arm of the OPERAM (OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in the Multimorbid elderly) trial underwent a CDSS-assisted structured medication review in four European hospitals. We evaluated the frequency of CDSS-generated STOPP/START signals and the subsequent acceptance of these signals by a trained pharmacotherapy team consisting of a physician and pharmacist after evaluation of clinical applicability to the individual patient, prior to discussing pharmacotherapy optimisation recommendations with the patient and attending physicians. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used to investigate potential patient-related (e.g. age, number of co-morbidities and medications) and setting-related (e.g. ward type, country of inclusion) determinants for acceptance of STOPP and START signals. RESULTS: In 819/826 (99%) of the patients, at least one STOPP/START signal was generated using a set of 110 algorithms based on STOPP/START v2 criteria. Overall, 39% of the 5080 signals were accepted by the pharmacotherapy team. There was a high variability in the frequency and the subsequent acceptance of the individual STOPP/START criteria. The acceptance ranged from 2.5 to 75.8% for the top ten most frequently generated STOPP and START signals. The signal to stop a drug without a clinical indication was most frequently generated (28%), with more than half of the signals accepted (54%). No difference in mean acceptance of STOPP versus START signals was found. In multivariate analysis, most patient-related determinants did not predict acceptance, although the acceptance of START signals increased in patients with one or more hospital admissions (+ 7.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-14.1) or one or more falls in the previous year (+ 7.1; 95% CI 0.7-13.4). A higher number of co-morbidities was associated with lower acceptance of STOPP (- 11.8%; 95% CI - 19.2 to - 4.5) and START (- 11.0%; 95% CI - 19.4 to - 2.6) signals for patients with more than nine and between seven and nine co-morbidities, respectively. For setting-related determinants, the acceptance differed significantly between the participating trial sites. Compared with Switzerland, the acceptance was higher in Ireland (STOPP: + 26.8%; 95% CI 16.8-36.7; START: + 31.1%; 95% CI 18.2-44.0) and in the Netherlands (STOPP: + 14.7%; 95% CI 7.8-21.7). Admission to a surgical ward was positively associated with acceptance of STOPP signals (+ 10.3%; 95% CI 3.8-16.8). CONCLUSION: The involvement of an expert team in translating population-based CDSS signals to individual patients is essential, as more than half of the signals for potential overuse, underuse, and misuse were not deemed clinically appropriate in a hospital setting. Patient-related potential determinants were poor predictors of acceptance. Future research investigating factors that affect patients' and physicians' agreement with medication changes recommended by expert teams may provide further insight for implementation in clinical practice. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02986425.