Assessing the prevalence of Beers medication utilization in the Medicare Part D population in 2020.

BACKGROUND: Medication utilization has been increasing in the U.S. year-over-year for several decades. As older adults take more medications, there is a higher risk of them being exposed to drug-drug or drug-disease interactions. The American Geriatrics Society in 2019 updated their Beers Criteria for Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIM) Use in Older Adults. The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of utilization of medications included in the 2019 Beers Criteria. METHODS: An analysis was conducted using the Medicare Part D Provider Utilization and Payment Data Public Use File for calendar-year 2020. Medications identified in the 2019 Beers Criteria were applied to the analysis. Two categories of medications were assessed: (1) "Avoid" and (2) "Use With Caution." RESULTS: In 2020, 56 million prescriptions were dispensed to Medicare patients 65 years and older that are recommended to be avoided without exception (4.7% of all prescriptions) totaling $957 million in medication costs. The most utilized medication classes in this category were benzodiazepines (25,949,994 prescriptions), "Z-drugs" (6,204,909 prescriptions), long-acting sulfonylureas (5,306,577 prescriptions), 1st-generation antihistamines (5,049,289 prescriptions), and tricyclic antidepressants (4,190,062 prescriptions). Additionally, 135 million prescriptions were dispensed to Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older for medications which the Beers Criteria states to use caution (11.3% of all prescriptions) exceeding $2.85 billion in medication costs. The most utilized medications for this category were diuretics (74,599,126 prescriptions), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (30,033,121 prescriptions), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (11,858,968 prescriptions), tramadol (11,450,878 prescriptions), and mirtazapine (5,737,304 prescriptions). CONCLUSION: Even with the existence of the AGS Beers Criteria for PIM Use in Older Adults and its continued updated versions, 16% of medications dispensed to Medicare Part D were potentially inappropriate. Future studies are needed to assess if this has led to worsened outcomes among older adults who utilized these PIM.

Improving medication prescribing-related outcomes for vulnerable elderly in transitions on high-risk medications (IMPROVE-IT HRM): a pilot randomized trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Seniors with recurrent hospitalizations who are taking multiple medications including high-risk medications are at particular risk for serious adverse medication events. We will assess whether an expert Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (CPT) medication management intervention during hospitalization with follow-up post-discharge and communication with circle of care is feasible and can decrease drug therapy problems amongst this group. METHODS: The design is a pragmatic pilot randomized trial with 1:1 patient-level concealed randomization with blinded outcome assessment and data analysis. Participants will be adults 65 years and older admitted to internal medicine services for more than 2 days, who have had at least one other hospitalization in the prior year, taking five or more chronic medications including at least one high-risk medication. The CPT intervention identifies medication targets; completes consult, including priorities for improving prescribing negotiated with the patient; starts the care plan; ensures a detailed discharge medication reconciliation and circle-of-care communication; and sees the patient at least twice after hospital discharge via virtual visits to consolidate the care plan in the community. Control group receives usual care. Primary outcomes are feasibility - recruitment, retention, costs, and clinical - number of drug therapy problems improved, with secondary outcomes examining coordination of transitions in care, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs. Follow-up is to 3-month posthospital discharge. DISCUSSION: If results support feasibility of ramp-up and promising clinical outcomes, a follow-up definitive trial will be organized using a developing national platform and medication appropriateness network. Since the intervention allows a very scarce medical specialty expertise to be offered via virtual care, there is potential to improve the safety, outcomes, and cost of care widely. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04077281.

Disentangling drug contributions: anticholinergic burden in older adults linked to individual medications: a cross-sectional population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Medications with potent anticholinergic properties have well-documented adverse effects. A high cumulative anticholinergic burden may arise from the concurrent use of multiple medications with weaker anticholinergic effects. We sought to identify patterns of high anticholinergic burden and associated patient characteristics. METHODS: We identified patients aged ≥ 65 who filled ≥ 1 medication with anticholinergic adverse effects in 2019 and had a cumulative Anticholinergic Burden score (ACB) ≥ 4 (i.e., high anticholinergic burden) in a large US health insurer. We classified patients based on how they attained high burden, as follows: 1) only filling strong or moderate anticholinergic medications (i.e., ACB = 2 or 3, "moderate/strong"), 2) only filling lightly anticholinergic medications (i.e., ACB = 1, "light/possible"), and 3) filling any combination ("mix"). We used multinomial logistic regression to assess the association between measured patient characteristics and membership in the three anticholinergic burden classifications, using the moderate/strong group as the referent. RESULTS: In total, 83,286 eligible patients with high anticholinergic burden were identified (mean age: 74.3 years (SD:7.1), 72.9% female). Of these, 4.5% filled only strong/moderate anticholinergics, 4.3% filled only light/possible anticholinergics, and the rest filled a mix (91.2%). Within patients in the mixed group, 64.3% of medication fills were for light/possible anticholinergics, while 35.7% were for moderate/strong anticholinergics. Compared with patients in the moderate/strong anticholinergics group, patients filling only light/possible anticholinergics were more likely to be older (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] per 1-unit of age: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.05-1.07), less likely to be female (aOR: 0.56, 95%CI: 0.50-0.62 vs. male), more likely to have comorbidities (e.g., heart failure aOR: 3.18, 95%CI: 2.70-3.74 or depression aOR: 1.20, 95%CI: 1.09-1.33 vs. no comorbidity), and visited fewer physicians (aOR per 1-unit of change: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.97-0.98). Patients in the mixed group were older (aOR per 1-unit of age: 1.02, 95%CI: 1.02-1.03) and less likely to be female (aOR: 0.89, 95%CI: 0.82-0.97 vs. male) compared with those filling moderate/strong anticholinergics. CONCLUSION: Most older adults accumulated high anticholinergic burden through a combination of light/possible and moderate/strong anticholinergics rather than moderate/strong anticholinergics, with light/possible anticholinergics being the major drivers of overall anticholinergic burden. These insights may inform interventions to improve prescribing in older adults.

Engagement is a necessary condition to test audit and feedback design features: results of a pragmatic, factorial, cluster-randomized trial with an embedded process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: While audit & feedback (A&F) is an effective implementation intervention, the design elements which maximize effectiveness are unclear. Partnering with a healthcare quality advisory organization already delivering feedback, we conducted a pragmatic, 2 × 2 factorial, cluster-randomized trial to test the impact of variations in two factors: (A) the benchmark used for comparison and (B) information framing. An embedded process evaluation explored hypothesized mechanisms of effect. METHODS: Eligible physicians worked in nursing homes in Ontario, Canada, and had voluntarily signed up to receive the report. Groups of nursing homes sharing physicians were randomized to (A) physicians' individual prescribing rates compared to top-performing peers (the top quartile) or the provincial median and (B) risk-framed information (reporting the number of patients prescribed high-risk medication) or benefit-framed information (reporting the number of patients not prescribed). We hypothesized that the top quartile comparator and risk-framing would lead to greater practice improvements. The primary outcome was the mean number of central nervous system-active medications per resident per month. Primary analyses compared the four arms at 6 months post-intervention. Factorial analyses were secondary. The process evaluation comprised a follow-up questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-seven physicians (152 clusters) were randomized: 67 to arm 1 (median benchmark, benefit framing), 65 to arm 2 (top quartile benchmark, benefit framing), 75 to arm 3 (median benchmark, risk framing), and 60 to arm 4 (top quartile benchmark, risk framing). There were no significant differences in the primary outcome across arms or for each factor. However, engagement was low (27-31% of physicians across arms downloaded the report). The process evaluation indicated that both factors minimally impacted the proposed mechanisms. However, risk-framed feedback was perceived as more actionable and more compatible with current workflows, whilst a higher target might encourage behaviour change when physicians identified with the comparator. CONCLUSIONS: Risk framing and a top quartile comparator have the potential to achieve change. Further work to establish the strategies most likely to enhance A&F engagement, particularly with physicians who may be most likely to benefit from feedback, is required to support meaningfully addressing intricate research questions concerning the design of A&F. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02979964 . Registered 29 November 2016.

Analysis of Medication Errors Reported by Community Pharmacists in the Republic of Korea: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background and objectives: We aimed to describe medication-related incidents or medication errors (MEs) reported by community pharmacists and analyze the prevalent medications involved. Materials and Methods: We extracted ME reports from databases comprising patient safety incidents reported to the Korean Pharmaceutical Association between January 2013 and June 2021. Medications were analyzed according to the second (therapeutic subgroup) and fifth (chemical substance) levels of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification. Results: A total of 9046 MEs were identified, most of which were near miss reports (88.3%). Among the errors that reached the patients (521 cases), harmful incidents accounted for 76.8%. Most MEs occurred during prescription (89.5%), while harmful MEs occurred mainly during dispensing (73.3%). In the prescription step, wrong drugs (44.8%), dosing errors (27.0%), and wrong durations (14.0%) were common. Anti-inflammatory and anti-rheumatic products (M01), drugs for acid-related disorders (A02), and antihistamines for systemic use (R06) were the most frequently reported medication classes involved. Harmful incidents were most common for dosing errors (31.0%) and wrong drugs (26.8%) and were common with warfarin, levothyroxine, and glimepiride. Conclusions: The MEs reported by community pharmacists were mainly prescribing errors, most of which were rectified before reaching patients. The prevalent medications involved in harmful errors include anti-diabetic, anti-thrombotic, and anti-inflammatory agents.

Home care nurses' management of high-risk medications: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: High-risk medications use at home entails an increased risk of significant harm to the patient. While interventions and strategies to improve medications care have been implemented in hospitals, it remains unclear how this type of medications care is provided in the home care setting. The objective was to describe home care nurses' management of high-risk medications. METHODS: A cross-sectional, descriptive design was set up in home care nurses in Flanders, Belgium. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling and could be included in the study if they provided medications care and worked as a home care nurses. Participants completed an online structured questionnaire. Questions were asked about demographic information, work experience, nurses' general attitude regarding high-risk medications, contact with high-risk medications and the assessment of risk and severity of harm, specific initiatives undertaken to improve high-risk medications care and the use of additional measures when dealing with high-risk medications. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: A total of 2283 home care nurses participated in this study. In our study, 98% of the nurses reported dealing high-risk medications. Home care nurses dealt the most with anticoagulants (96%), insulin (94%) and hypnotics and sedatives (87%). Most nurses took additional measures with high-risk medications in less than 25% of the cases, with the individual double check being the most performed measure for all high-risk medications except lithium. Nurses employed by an organization received support mostly in the form of a procedure while self-employed nurses mostly look for support through external organizations and information sources. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows several gaps regarding high-risk medications care, which can imply safety risks. Implementation and evaluation of more standardized high-risk medications care, developing and implementing procedures or guidelines and providing continuous training for home care nurses are advised.

Admission Medication Reconciliations in Pediatric Patients Admitted to an Inpatient Psychiatry Unit.

OBJECTIVE: Medication errors resulting in adverse drug events may occur during transition of care. Most can be prevented with a medication reconciliation. California Senate Bill 1254 requires a pharmacist to perform an admission medication reconciliation (AMR) to obtain an accurate medication list for each high-risk patient upon hospital admission. Adult patient literature reveals that antidepressant, antipsychotic, and mood-stabilizing drugs are high-risk medications likely to cause errors. Therefore, the purpose of this analysis is to determine if pediatric psychiatry inpatients should be considered high risk, meriting an additional AMR by the pharmacy team. METHODS: This was a retrospective, single-center analysis of pediatric patients admitted to the inpatient psychiatry unit at Rady Children's Hospital, San Diego between January 1 and 31, 2021. All newly admitted patients had an AMR performed by the medical team (physician-led AMR). High-risk patients (prescribed a high-risk medication or 3 or more medications of any kind prior to admission) had an additional AMR by the pharmacy team (pharmacy-led AMR). Differences between these 2 AMRs were examined. RESULTS: Of the 58 patients admitted during the study period, 39 (67.2%) were identified as high risk, warranting an AMR by the pharmacy team. From the 170 medications reviewed, 51 differences (30%) were found between physician-led and pharmacy-led AMR, with 4 (2.4%) of the differences involving high-risk medications. No medications were incorrectly ordered, and no adverse drug events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Given that physician-led and pharmacy-led AMRs of high-risk prescription medications were only marginally different and no medications were incorrectly ordered, the existing AMR methodology used by psychiatrists at our institution is effective at creating a safe medication list.

Impact of an electronic health record alert on inappropriate prescribing of high-risk medications to patients with concurrent "do not give" orders.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of clinical decision support (CDS) alerts tied to high-risk medications at a Michigan health system by determining the true prescriber action rate in response to select "do not give" (DNG) alerts. METHODS: A retrospective review of prescriber actions in response to CDS alerts was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of alerts designed to prevent prescribing of high-risk medications to patients with concurrent DNG orders. The primary endpoint was the overall action rate, determined by totaling orders cancelled within the alert display and orders modified shortly after an alert. The overall action rate was hypothesized to significantly exceed the action rate estimated on the basis of alert overrides alone. Following the initial review, changes were made to the alert format and preset documentation choices ("acknowledgement comments"), and it was hypothesized that these changes would increase the overall action rate. A repeat analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of these changes. RESULTS: Across a total of 506 CDS alerts over 14 months, 78% resulted in prescribers modifying orders to comply with alert recommendations. Prescribers cancelled orders in response to only 26% of alerts, often overriding alerts prior to modifying orders. Documentation of rationale or approval for overrides was inconsistent, and while requiring acknowledgement comments facilitated documentation of prescriber rationale, it did not consistently improve overall action rates. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that override rates alone are not good markers for the true effectiveness of CDS alerts and support the need for frequent evaluation of alerts at the institutional level. CDS alerts remain a valuable tool to prevent inappropriate prescribing of high-risk medications and for promoting patient safety.

Opioid and benzodiazepine use in the emergency department and the recognition of delirium within the first 24 hours of hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE: Delirium is a common and serious brain dysfunction. The objective of our study was to test the hypothesis that opioids and benzodiazepines exposure in the emergency department (ED) is associated with delirium. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study, including patients aged 65 years and older who were hospitalized from ED at an academic medical center from 2014 to 2017. Medication administration records were used to identify opioids and benzodiazepines given during the ED stay. Nurses used the Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOSS) twice daily to assess delirium during hospitalization. The outcome was a positive DOSS within 1 day of ED encounter. We used logistic regression to predict the outcome of positive delirium screening by opioids and benzodiazepines. RESULTS: A total of 7927 ED encounters that resulted in hospitalization were included in the analysis. We identified 2008 visits (25.3%) with a positive delirium screen. A total of 3304 (41.7%) received opioids, and 1801 (22.7%) received benzodiazepines. In this cohort, opioids were not associated with an increased odds of delirium (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87-1.15). Benzodiazepines were associated with increased odds of delirium (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.13-1.65), as were benzodiazepines combined with opioids (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.33-1.97). CONCLUSION: In this study, the use of benzodiazepines was associated with a risk of delirium. The use of opioids did not increase the risk of delirium. Our findings imply that judicious pain management with opioids in the ED might not increase the risk of delirium.

The impact of high-risk medications on mortality risk among older adults with polypharmacy: evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is common among older people and is associated with an increased mortality risk. However, little is known about whether the mortality risk is related to specific medications among older adults with polypharmacy. This study therefore aimed to investigate associations between high-risk medications and all-cause and cause-specific mortality among older adults with polypharmacy. METHODS: This study included 1356 older adults with polypharmacy (5+ long-term medications a day for conditions or symptoms) from Wave 6 (2012/2013) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. First, using the agglomerative hierarchical clustering method, participants were grouped according to the use of 14 high-risk medication categories. Next, the relationship between the high-risk medication patterns and all-cause and cause-specific mortality (followed up to April 2018) was examined. All-cause mortality was assessed by Cox proportional hazards model and competing-risk regression was employed for cause-specific mortality. RESULTS: Five high-risk medication patterns-a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors cluster, a mental health drugs cluster, a central nervous system (CNS) drugs cluster, a RAAS inhibitors and antithrombotics cluster, and an antithrombotics cluster-were identified. The mental health drugs cluster showed increased risks of all-cause (HR = 1.55, 95%CI = 1.05, 2.28) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) (SHR = 2.11, 95%CI = 1.10, 4.05) mortality compared with the CNS drug cluster over 6 years, while others showed no differences in mortality. Among these patterns, the mental health drugs cluster showed the highest prevalence of antidepressants (64.1%), benzodiazepines (10.4%), antipsychotics (2.4%), antimanic agents (0.7%), opioids (33.2%), and muscle relaxants (21.5%). The findings suggested that older adults with polypharmacy who took mental health drugs (primarily antidepressants), opioids, and muscle relaxants were at higher risk of all-cause and CVD mortality, compared with those who did not take these types of medications. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the inclusion of opioids in the current guidance on structured medication reviews, but it also suggests that older adults with polypharmacy who take psychotropic medications and muscle relaxants are prone to adverse outcomes and therefore may need more attention. The reinforcement of structured medication reviews would contribute to early intervention in medication use which may consequently reduce medication-related problems and bring clinical benefits to older adults with polypharmacy.

Patient harm from cardiovascular medications.

BACKGROUND: Medication harm can lead to hospital admission, prolonged hospital stay and poor patient outcomes. Reducing medication harm is a priority for healthcare organisations worldwide. Recent Australian studies demonstrate cardiovascular (CV) medications are a leading cause of harm. However, they appear to receive less recognition as 'high risk' medications compared with those classified by the medication safety acronym, 'APINCH' (antimicrobials, potassium, insulin, narcotics, chemotherapeutics, heparin). Our aim was to determine the scale and type of medication harm caused by CV medications in healthcare. METHODS: A narrative review of adult (>16 years) medication harm literature identified from PubMed and CINAHL databases was undertaken. Studies with the primary outcome of measuring the incidence of medication harm were included. Harm caused by CV medications was described and ranked against other medication classes at four key stages of a patient's healthcare journey. Where specified, the implicated medications and type of harm were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 75 studies were identified, including seven systematic reviews and three meta-analyses, with most focussing on harm causing hospital admission. CV medications were responsible for approximately 20% of medication harm; however, this proportion increased to 50% in older populations. CV medications were consistently ranked in the top five medication categories causing harm and were often listed as the leading cause. CONCLUSION: CV medications are a leading cause of medication harm, particularly in older adults, and should be the focus of harm mitigation strategies. A practical approach to generate awareness among health professionals is to incorporate 'C' (for CV medications) into the 'APINCH' acronym. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Patient harm from cardiovascular medications: Background: • Harm from medications can cause poor patient outcomes.• Certain medications have been identified as 'high risk' and are known to cause high rates of harm.• 'High risk' medications are included in medication guidelines used by health professionals.• Cardiovascular medications (e.g. blood pressure and cholesterol medications) are important and have many benefits.• Recent studies have found cardiovascular medications to cause high rates of harm.• Cardiovascular medication harm is often under-recognised in clinical practice.• Some guidelines do not consider cardiovascular medications to be 'high risk'.Method: • This review investigated the extent of harm caused by cardiovascular medications in adults across four healthcare settings:(1) at the time of hospital admission;(2) during hospital admission;(3) after hospital; and(4) readmission to hospital.• Harm caused by cardiovascular medications was ranked against other medication classes.• We investigated the type of cardiovascular medications to cause harm and the type of harm caused.Results: • Seventy-five studies were reviewed across 41 countries.• Cardiovascular medications were ranked within the top five medications to cause harm.• Cardiovascular medications were a leading cause of harm in each healthcare setting investigated.• Harm caused by cardiovascular medications was common in older adults (>65 years).• Cardiovascular medications often caused preventable harm.• Medications to treat high blood pressure and abnormal heart rhythms were the most common causes of harm.• We reported kidney injury, electrolyte changes and low blood pressure as common types of harm.Conclusion: • Increased focus on cardiovascular medications in clinical practice is needed.• Health professionals need to carefully prescribe and frequently review cardiovascular medications, especially in older adults.• Patient and health professional discussions should be based on both the benefits and harms of cardiovascular medications.• Cardiovascular medications should be included in all 'high risk' medication guidelines.

Improving Medical Students Learning Through an Interprofessional Pharmacotherapy Selective.

PURPOSE: Current trends in medical school education indicate an existing need for increasing medical student exposure to pharmacotherapy education. The objectives of this study are to describe the development of an interprofessional, application-based Pharmacotherapeutics in Primary Care selective for 3rd year medical students and to assess its influence on knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to pharmacotherapy of high-risk medications and patient populations. METHODS: The selective was implemented across fourteen cohorts of medical students that were evaluated over a 5-year academic period (n = 68). Our curriculum was unique in that it merged basic pharmacology and pharmacotherapy concepts with application-based medication management of high-risk patients in addition to the incorporation of an interprofessional home visit experience. RESULTS: Pre- and post-assessment analyses found statistically significant improvements in students' pharmacotherapeutic knowledge and skills. There was a significant increase in the knowledge post-test mean score (71.8; SD = 11.2) compared to the pre-test mean score (57.3; SD = 11.9; P < .001). A similar trend was observed for the skills mean score in which the post-test average (63; SD = 16.9) was significantly higher than the pretest average (23.3; SD = 14.4; P < 0.001). Students' attitudes also improved when rating their confidence in completing specific tasks such as recommending dosing regimens and utilizing drug information resources. CONCLUSION: This intervention provided 3rd-year medical students with opportunities to improve their knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to the pharmacotherapeutic management of high-risk medications and patient populations while exploring meaningful interprofessional interactions with faculty and learners from other disciplines.

Identifying Potential High-Risk Medication Errors Using Telepharmacy and a Web-Based Survey Tool.

BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION: Obtaining patient medication histories during emergency department (ED) admissions is an important step towards identifying potential errors that could otherwise remain in the patient's active medication list. This is a descriptive report of a standardized, electronic data collection tool created to document potential medication errors in patients receiving high-risk medications during ED admissions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Trained pharmacy technicians completed a survey following medication history collection using a secure web platform called REDCap®. Data collected included patient-specific information, the number and type of high-risk medications, and potential medication errors identified in the collection process. RESULTS: During a pilot period of April 2019 to October 2020, 191 patient records were completed using the survey tool. Out of a total of 1088 medications recorded, 41% were considered high-risk medications. 42% of potential medication errors were classified as high-risk medication errors. Results from this survey tool demonstrated that 58% of high-risk medication orders could potentially result in a medication error that can be carried through patient admission and discharge. DISCUSSION: Accurate medication history and transitions of care can significantly impact patient quality of life. The cost of addressing a medication related-adverse event is also substantial. Based on published reports, annual gross savings to a hospital is estimated to be $4532 per harmful error in 2020, after adjusting for inflation. This equated to approximately $1,182,852 in estimated savings for Ascension Texas in 18 months. Nationwide, preventing potential medication errors in an outpatient setting can save on average $3.5 billion per year. CONCLUSION: This web-based survey tool has improved the quality and efficiency of potential error identification during medication history collection by pharmacy technicians. This information can be easily retrieved and aid in discussions regarding medication reconciliation at the leadership level and impact patient treatment outcomes by developing virtual processes that may result in fewer medication related events.

Prevalence of high-risk medications in patients enrolled in the Hospital Elder Life Program.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess the prevalence of newly prescribed antipsychotic/benzodiazepine medication, as well as 30-day readmissions, among Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP)-enrolled patients. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. SETTING: HELP intervention took place in eight hospital units. The standard care group was selected from eight additional hospital units. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized patients, aged 65 years and older, enrolled in HELP during between January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2018 were included in the HELP cohort. Patients hospitalized in eight additional units during the same time frame were part of the standard care group. MEASUREMENTS: Antipsychotic/benzodiazepine medications were pulled from the electronic health record. History of chronic mental illnesses were classified by ICD10 codes. Basic descriptive statistics were used to analyze patient characteristics and comorbidities. Chi-squared and t-tests were performed to detect statistical differences as appropriate. RESULTS: There were 1411 patients in the HELP group and 10,807 patients in the standard care group. The HELP group was likely to be older, female and to have a shorten length of stay (all p ≤ 0.02). Our study demonstrated that approximately 8.9% (n = 125) of patients enrolled in HELP received an order for antipsychotics during their hospital admission, while 31.5% (n = 3400) from the standard care group (p < 0.001). The difference in benzodiazepine prescription in patients enrolled in HELP was also less when comparing the two groups (22.8% HELP vs 25.6% standard care; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Patients enrolled in the HELP group were less likely to receive a prescription for antipsychotics or benzodiazepines. The majority of patients enrolled in HELP were discharged to a more independent environment (home or assisted living) and there was a relatively low 30-day readmission rate among HELP patients.

Implementing a high-risk medication education introductory pharmacy practice experience.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to implement a sustainable high-risk medication education (HRME) experience for student pharmacists, assess the impact on institutional metrics, and evaluate student competence. EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING: Students completed a longitudinal introductory pharmacy practice experience (IPPE) to provide patient education on anticoagulant and antiplatelet medications. Data collected included student feedback on the experience, the achievement of applicable pre-advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) core domains, student effect on number of patients counseled, and number of patient interactions per student. FINDINGS: Student feedback of the HRME experience indicated that 98% either strongly agreed or agreed to meeting defined parameters. Ninety-seven percent of students completing the experience demonstrated achievement of all applicable domain abilities. Over a three-year period, students educated 1055 patients. SUMMARY: The creation of a sustainable HRME experience for student pharmacists allowed for the achievement of applicable pre-APPE core domains. It also enhanced institutional metrics by greatly increasing the number of patient touches and providing students with direct patient care opportunities on a consistent basis.

A multiple-behaviour investigation of goal prioritisation in physicians receiving audit and feedback to address high-risk prescribing in nursing homes.

BACKGROUND: As part of their professional role, healthcare providers enact multiple competing goal-directed behaviours in time-constrained environments. Better understanding healthcare providers' motivation to engage in the pursuit of particular goals may help inform the development of implementation interventions. We investigated healthcare providers' pursuit of multiple goals as part of a trial evaluating the effectiveness of an audit and feedback intervention in supporting appropriate adjustment of high-risk medication prescribing by physicians working in nursing homes. Our objectives were to determine whether goal priority and constructs from Social Cognitive Theory (self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and descriptive norms) predicted intention to adjust prescribing of multiple high-risk medications and to investigate how physicians in nursing homes prioritise their goals related to high-risk medication prescribing. METHODS: Physicians in Ontario, Canada, who signed up for and accessed the audit and feedback report were invited to complete a questionnaire assessing goal priority, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, descriptive norms, and intention in relation to the three targeted behaviours (adjusting prescribing of antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, and antidepressants) and a control behaviour (adjusting statin prescribing). We conducted multiple linear regression analyses to identify predictors of intention. We also conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews to investigate how physicians in nursing homes prioritise their goals in relation to appropriately adjusting prescribing of the medications included in the report: analysis was informed by the framework analysis method. RESULTS: Thirty-three of 89 (37%) physicians completed the questionnaire. Goal priority was the only significant predictor of intention for each medication type; the greater a priority it was for physicians to appropriately adjust their prescribing, the stronger was their intention to do so. Across five interviews, physicians reported prioritising adjustment of antipsychotic prescribing specifically. This was influenced by negative media coverage of antipsychotic prescribing in nursing homes, the provincial government's mandate to address antipsychotic prescribing, and by the deprescribing initiatives or best practice routines in place in their nursing homes. CONCLUSIONS: Goal priority predicted nursing home physicians' intention to adjust prescribing. Targeting goal priority through implementation interventions therefore has the potential to influence behaviour via increased motivation. Implementation intervention developers should consider the external factors that may drive physicians' prioritization.

Healthcare Professionals Risk Assessments for Alert Overrides in High-Risk IV Infusions Using Simulated Scenarios.

This study aimed to use healthcare professionals' assessments to calculate expected risk of intravenous (IV) infusion harm for simulated high-risk medications that exceed soft limits and to investigate the impact of relevant risk factors. We designed 30 infusion scenarios for four high-risk medications, propofol, morphine, insulin, and heparin, infused in adult intensive care unit (AICU) and adult medical and surgical care unit (AMSU). A total of 20 pharmacists and 5 nurses provided their assessed expected risk of harm in each scenario. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance with least square mean, and post hoc test were conducted to test the effects of field limit type, soft (SoftMax), and hard maximum drug limit types (HardMax), and care area-medication combination on risk of harm. The results showed that overdosing scenarios with continuous and bolus dose limit types were assessed with significantly higher risks than those of bolus dose rate type. An overdose infusion in AICU over a large SoftMax was assessed to be of higher risk than over a small one, but not in AMSU. For overdose infusions with three levels of drug amount, greater drug amount in AICU and AMSU was assessed to have higher risk, except insignificant risk difference between the infusions with higher and moderate drug amount in AMSU. This study obtained expected risk for simulated high-risk IV infusions and found that different field limit and SoftMax types can affect expected risk based on healthcare professionals' perspectives. The findings will be regarded as benchmarks for validating risk quantification models in future research.

Drug-related problems and pharmacy interventions in non-prescription medication, with a focus on high-risk over-the-counter medications.

Background The risks associated with over-the-counter medication are often underestimated by consumers. The incorrect use of certain medications can lead to significant patient harm. Inappropriate use can be prevented by pharmaceutical counselling. Objective To determine the number and nature of drug-related problems in over-the-counter medication with a special emphasis on high-risk over-the-counter medications. Setting Fifty-two community pharmacies in Finland. Method This observational study was conducted as a questionnaire survey. The pharmacists working in participating pharmacies documented the observed drug-related problems and pharmacy interventions in over-the-counter medication during 1 week using an electronic study form based on the Westerlund drug-related problem classification system. Main outcome measure The prevalence of drug-related problems and problem types in different medication categories. Results The 52 community pharmacies documented 339 drug-related problems in 0.6% of over-the-counter customers, the most common problem being "Uncertainty about the indication for the drug" (39.2%). A significant proportion of the documented problems (26.3%) concerned high-risk over-the-counter medications, and the majority of these cases were associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (21.8%). In total, pharmacies made 641 interventions to resolve the drug-related problems. For majority of drug-related problems (87%), pharmacist's intervention involved counselling. In more than half of the problem cases, the pharmacy intervention was precautionary. Conclusion Pharmacists intervene in and prevent problems related to over-the-counter medications, including high-risk medications like analgesics, in which inappropriate use due to consumers' lack of knowledge can lead to severe consequences. As the selection and use of over-the-counter medications is continuously increasing, pharmaceutical counselling should be readily available and actively provided for consumers to achieve safer self-medication.

Geriatric Consultation Reduces High-risk Medication Usage at Discharge in Elderly Trauma Patients.

Background Traumatic injury in a growing geriatric population is associated with higher mortality and complication rates. Geriatric consultation (GC) is vital in reducing risk factors that contribute to adverse outcomes. This study aims to determine if receiving a GC had an impact on high-risk medication usage. Methods Patients eligible for a GC, age ≥ 65, and length of stay > two days, were identified via a chart review from July 2013 to July 2014 at a Level II trauma center. This population was divided into those with and without a GC. Data collected included demographics, injury severity, medications, delirium, mortality, and readmissions. High-risk medications were defined using the Beers Criteria. Statistical analysis involved using appropriate standard tests to compare groups, including multivariate logistic regression. Results Forty-nine of a total of 104 patients received a GC. Groups were comparable on injury severity score, co-morbidities, and high-risk medication use upon admissions. The GC group was 74% less likely to be discharged on high-risk medications than the non-GC group. Conclusion GC in elderly trauma patients reduces high-risk medication use upon discharge. Further studies are needed to explore how GC impacts readmission rates and mortality. A multidisciplinary trauma team, including a geriatrician, must exist to address the unique medical, psychological, functional, and social issues of a growing, aged trauma population.

High-Risk Medications in Hospitalized Elderly Adults: Are We Making It Easy to Do the Wrong Thing?

OBJECTIVES: To examine dosages of high-risk medications administered to elderly adults who fall in the hospital and to determine whether electronic default doses are appropriate for elderly adults. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Large urban academic hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 65 and older experiencing a fall. MEASUREMENTS: Prescribed daily dosages and use of high-risk medications (opiates, benzodiazepines, benzodiazepine-receptor agonists (BRAs), sleep medications, muscle relaxants, antipsychotics) administered within 24 hours before a fall were ascertained and compared with published recommended dosages for older adults and the hospital's electronic medical record (EMR) default doses for these drugs. RESULTS: Of 328 falls, 62% occurred in individuals administered at least one high-risk medication within the 24 hours before the fall, with 16% of the falls involving individuals receiving two, and another 16% in individuals receiving three or more. High-risk medications were often administered at higher-than-recommended geriatric daily doses, in particular benzodiazepines and BRAs, for which the dose was higher than recommended in 29 of 51 cases (57%). Hospital EMR default doses were higher than recommended for 41% (12/29) of medications examined. CONCLUSION: High-risk medications were administered to older fallers. Doses administered and EMR default doses were often higher than recommended. Decreasing EMR default doses for individuals aged 65 and older and warnings about the cumulative numbers of high-risk medications prescribed per person may be simple interventions that could decrease inpatient falls.