Evaluating prescriptions for the elderly: drug/age criteria as a tool to help community pharmacists.

OBJECTIVES: To use drug/age criteria to determine (1) the prevalence of dispensing of drugs potentially inappropriate for use in elderly patients; (2) the dispensing rate of individual drugs considered potentially inappropriate for use in elderly patients; (3) the association between selected patient characteristics and the prevalence of potentially inappropriate drug dispensing. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: A secondary database of 6,380 new prescription orders dispensed to patients of all ages in ambulatory pharmacies in a mid-western state was used retrospectively for the analysis. A total of 1,530 (23.9%) of the new prescription orders were dispensed to 1,185 elderly patients. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Name, strength, and daily dose of each drug dispensed were compared with drug/age criteria to determine whether a dispensed drug was inappropriate for use in elderly patients. The association of the rate of dispensing of potentially inappropriate drugs with characteristics of the elderly patients, including age, sex, race, number of comorbidities, and prescription drug insurance coverage type, was determined. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients (14.3%) were dispensed potentially inappropriate medications. The three most common medications were propoxyphene and propoxyphene combinations, prescription and nonprescription antihistamines, and digoxin at doses > 0.125 mg/day. There was no statistically significant association between inappropriate drug dispensing and patient age, sex, race, number of comorbidities, and prescription drug insurance coverage type. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists can use drug/age criteria as a tool for an initial check to assess the appropriateness of drugs used by the elderly. Elderly patients appear equally at risk of using potentially inappropriate medications regardless of demographic, disease, or insurance characteristics.

Guidelines for nonemergency use of parenteral phenytoin products: proceedings of an expert panel consensus process. Panel on Nonemergency Use of Parenteral Phenytoin Products.

This document summarizes the proceedings of an expert panel consensus process addressing the nonemergency use of parenteral phenytoin products for management of seizures in pediatric and adult patients. The algorithm and consensus statements developed by the expert panel emphasize strategies for lowering the probability of adverse events associated with the use of parenteral phenytoin products. Specific patient characteristics are defined to guide administration and monitoring of parenteral phenytoin therapy. The algorithm provides a decision pathway for the selection of the product and the route of administration of phenytoin sodium or fosphenytoin sodium after it has been determined that a parenteral phenytoin product is appropriate. Key factors covered in the algorithm include a list of patient characteristics and considerations necessary to prevent parenteral phenytoin adverse effects during selection of administration route and recommendations for monitoring of parenteral phenytoin therapy once it has been initiated. Situations requiring rapid attainment of high phenytoin concentrations, such as in the management of acute seizures, are not addressed in these guidelines.

Cost-offset analysis of aprotinin in high-risk coronary artery bypass.

Aprotinin, a naturally occurring protease inhibitor derived from bovine lung, is used prophylactically to minimize the amount of perioperative blood loss in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery who are at high risk for excessive bleeding. A retrospective multicenter evaluation of aprotinin use was performed in high-risk coronary artery bypass graft patients treated either with aprotinin or according to usual-care to assess (1) differences in demographic and medical history characteristics, and (2) clinical and economic outcomes associated with their care. This study suggests that in many cases, the cost of aprotinin is offset by reductions in overall cost. Additional study is required to better understand this potential. In other cases, however, a more conservative approach to aprotinin use appears to be warranted.

Economic considerations in Alzheimer's disease.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the third most expensive disease in the United States, costing society approximately $100 billion each year. It is one of the most prevalent illnesses in the elderly population, and with the aging of society, will become even more significant. Costs associated with AD include direct medical costs such as nursing home care, direct nonmedical costs such as in-home day care, and indirect costs such as lost patient and caregiver productivity. Medical treatment may have economic benefits by slowing the rate of cognitive decline, delaying institutionalization, reducing caregiver hours, and improving quality of life. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations have shown positive results regarding the effect of drug therapy on nursing home placement, cognition, and caregiver time.

Economic evaluations of clinical pharmacy services--1988-1995. The Publications Committee of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy.

The objectives of this effort were to summarize and critique original economic assessments of clinical pharmacy services published from 1988-1995, and to make recommendations for future work in this area. A literature search was conducted to identify articles that were than blinded and randomly assigned to reviewers to confirm inclusion, abstract information, and assess the quality of study design. The 104 articles fell into four main categories based on type of service described: disease state management (4%), general pharmacotherapeutic monitoring (36%), pharmacokinetic monitoring services (13%), and targeted drug programs (47%). Articles were categorized by type of evaluation; 35% were considered outcome analyses, 32% outcome descriptions, and 18% full economic analyses. A majority (89%) of the studies reviewed described positive financial benefits from the clinical services evaluated; however, many (68%) did not include the input costs of providing the clinical service as part of the evaluation. Studies that were well conducted were most likely to demonstrate positive results. Commonly, results were expressed as net savings or costs avoided for a given time period or per patient. Seven studies expressed results as a benefit:cost ratio (these ranged from 1.08:1 to 75.84:1, mean 16.70:1). Overall this body of literature contains a wealth of information pertinent to the value of the clinical practice of pharmacy. Future economic evaluations of clinical pharmacy services should incorporate sound study design and evaluate practice in alternative settings.