Anticipatory care planning for community-dwelling older adults at risk of functional decline: a feasibility cluster randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility, implementation and outcomes of an Anticipatory Care Planning (ACP) intervention in primary care to assist older adults at risk of functional decline by developing a personalized support plan. DESIGN: Feasibility cluster randomized control trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Eight primary care practices (four in Northern Ireland, United Kingdom and four in the Republic of Ireland) were randomly assigned to either intervention or control arm. Eligible patients were those identified in each practice as 70 years of age or older and assessed as at risk of functional decline. Study participants (intervention n = 34, control n = 31) and research staff were not blinded to group assignment. ANTICIPATORY CARE INTERVENTION: The intervention delivered by a registered nurse including: a) a home-based patient assessment; b) care planning on the basis of a holistic patient assessment, and c) documentation of a support plan. OUTCOME MEASURES: A conceptual framework (RE-AIM) guided the assessment on the potential impact of the ACP intervention on patient quality of life, mental health, healthcare utilisation, costs, perception of person-centred care, and reduction of potentially inappropriate prescribing. Data were collected at baseline and at 10 weeks and six months following delivery of the intervention. RESULTS: All pre-specified feasibility indicators were met. Patients were unanimous in the acceptance of the ACP intervention. Health care providers viewed the ACP intervention as feasible to implement in routine clinical practice with attending community supports. While there were no significant differences on the primary outcomes (EQ-5D-5L: -0.07 (-0.17, 0.04) p = .180; CES-D: 1.2 (-2.5, 4.8) p = .468) and most secondary measures, ancillary analysis on social support showed responsiveness to the intervention. Incremental cost analysis revealed a mean reduction in costs of €320 per patient (95% CI -31 to 25; p = 0.82) for intervention relative to the control. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully tested the ACP intervention in primary care settings and have shown that it is feasible to implement. The ACP intervention deserves further testing in a definitive trial to determine whether its implementation would lead to better outcomes or reduced costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT03902743 . Registered on 4 April 2019.

Anticipatory care planning intervention for older adults at risk of functional decline: study protocol for a primary care cluster feasibility randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The treatment and management of long-term health conditions is the greatest challenge facing health systems around the world today. Innovative approaches to patient care in the community such as Anticipatory Care Planning (ACP), which seek to help with the provision of high-quality comprehensive care to older adults at risk of functional decline, require evaluation. This study will evaluate one approach that will include primary care as the setting for ACP. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will help to determine the feasibility for a definitive randomised trial to evaluate the implementation and outcomes of an ACP intervention. The intervention will be delivered by specially trained registered nurses in a primary care setting with older adults identified as at risk of functional decline. The intervention will comprise: (a) information collection via patient assessment; (b) facilitated informed dialogue between the patient, family carer, general practitioner and other healthcare practitioners; and, (c) documentation of the agreed support plan and follow-up review dates. Through a structured consultation with patients and their family carers, the nurses will complete a mutually agreed personalised support plan. DISCUSSION: This study will determine the feasibility for a full trial protocol to evaluate the implementation and outcomes of an (ACP) intervention in primary care to assist older adults aged 70 years of age or older and assessed as being at risk of functional decline. The study will be implemented in two jurisdictions on the island of Ireland which employ different health systems but which face similar health challenges. This study will allow us to examine important issues, such as the impact of two different healthcare systems on the health of older people and the influence of different legislative interpretations on undertaking cross jurisdictional research in Ireland. PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 1, 17 September 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT03902743. Registered on 4 April 2019.

Economic impact of potentially inappropriate prescribing and related adverse events in older people: a cost-utility analysis using Markov models.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the economic impact of three drugs commonly involved in potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in adults aged ≥65 years, including their adverse effects (AEs): long-term use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), benzodiazepines and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) at maximal dose; to assess cost-effectiveness of potential interventions to reduce PIP of each drug. DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis. We developed Markov models incorporating the AEs of each PIP, populated with published estimates of probabilities, health system costs (in 2014 euro) and utilities. PARTICIPANTS: A hypothetical cohort of 65 year olds analysed over 35 1-year cycles with discounting at 5% per year. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios with 95% credible intervals (CIs, generated in probabilistic sensitivity analysis) between each PIP and an appropriate alternative strategy. Models were then used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of potential interventions to reduce PIP for each of the three drug classes. RESULTS: All three PIP drugs and their AEs are associated with greater cost and fewer QALYs compared with alternatives. The largest reduction in QALYs and incremental cost was for benzodiazepines compared with no sedative medication (€3470, 95% CI €2434 to €5001; -0.07 QALYs, 95% CI -0.089 to -0.047), followed by NSAIDs relative to paracetamol (€806, 95% CI €415 and €1346; -0.07 QALYs, 95% CI -0.131 to -0.026), and maximal dose PPIs compared with maintenance dose PPIs (€989, 95% CI -€69 and €2127; -0.01 QALYs, 95% CI -0.029 to 0.003). For interventions to reduce PIP, at a willingness-to-pay of €45 000 per QALY, targeting NSAIDs would be cost-effective up to the highest intervention cost per person of €1971. For benzodiazepine and PPI interventions, the equivalent cost was €1480 and €831, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term benzodiazepine and NSAID prescribing are associated with significantly increased costs and reduced QALYs. Targeting inappropriate NSAID prescribing appears to be the most cost-effective PIP intervention.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control.

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise­from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists­has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care­its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families­are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

Prescribing patterns of glucosamine in an older population: a national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Glucosamine is commonly prescribed as a disease modulating agent in osteoarthritis. However, the evidence to date suggests that it has a limited impact on the clinical symptoms of the disease including joint pain, radiological progression, function and quality of life. The aim of this study was to examine the prescribing patterns of glucosamine from 2002-2011 in an elderly Irish national population cohort using data from the Health Service Executive Primary Care Reimbursement (HSE-PCRS) General medical services (GMS) Scheme. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 70 years on the HSE-PCRS pharmacy claims database between January 2002 and December 2011 were included. ATC code M01AX05 (glucosamine) was extracted. Prevalence rates per 1000 eligible population with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for all years and age groups (70-74 years, ≥75 years). A negative binomial regression analysis was used to determine longitudinal usage trends and compare prevalence rates across years, sex and age groups. RESULTS: The annual patient rate of glucosamine prescribing increased significantly from 13.0/1000 eligible population (95% CI 12.6-13.4) in 2002 to 68.7/1000 population (95% CI 67.8-69.5) in 2009 before decreasing to 62.4/1000 population (95% CI 61.6-63.2) in 2011. The rate of prescribing of glucosamine varied with sex, with women receiving significantly more prescriptions than men. The cost of glucosamine also increased from 2002-2008. In 2008 total expenditure reached a high of €4.6 million before decreasing to €2.6 million in 2011. CONCLUSION: The national trend in prescribing of glucosamine increased significantly from 2002 to 2009 before decreasing in 2010 and 2011, in keeping with current international guidelines. There is a need for awareness among healthcare professionals and patients alike of the best available evidence to inform decision making relating to the prescription and consumption of such supplements.

Medication use in early pregnancy-prevalence and determinants of use in a prospective cohort of women.

PURPOSE: To examine the extent, nature and determinants of medication use in early pregnancy. METHODS: We reviewed early pregnancy medication use, as reported to a midwife at the booking interview, in women delivering between 2000 and 2007 in a large maternity hospital in Dublin, Ireland (n = 61 252). RESULTS: Excluding folic acid, at least one medication was reported in 23 989 (39.2%) pregnancies. Over the counter (OTC) medications were reported in 11 970 (19.5%) pregnancies, illicit drugs or methadone in 545 (0.9%) and herbal medicines/supplements in 352 (0.58%). FDA category D and X medications were reported by 1532 (2.5%) and 1987 (3.2%) women. Asthma, depression and hypertension were among the most commonly reported chronic medical disorders. Medications with potential for foetal harm were reported by 86 (15.7%) women treated for depression and 68 (20%) women treated for hypertension. Factors associated with reporting the use of medications with potential for foetal harm included unplanned pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.52), booking at less than 12 weeks gestation (aOR 1.83, 95%CI 1.58-2.13), being above 25 years of age, unemployed (aOR 2.58, 95%CI 2.03-3.29), nulliparous (aOR 1.41; 95%CI 1.22-1.63), single (aOR 1.28; 95%CI 1.06-1.54) or smoking during pregnancy (aOR 1.96, 95%CI 1.67-2.28). CONCLUSIONS: Women frequently report medication use in early pregnancy. Women and prescribers need to be aware of the lack of pregnancy safety data for many medications, and the need for pre-pregnancy planning. Prescribers should ensure that optimal medications are used when treating women of childbearing potential with chronic medical disorders.