Effectiveness of Bundled Hyperpolypharmacy Deprescribing Compared With Usual Care Among Older Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Older patients using many prescription drugs (hyperpolypharmacy) may be at increased risk of adverse drug effects. Objective: To test the effectiveness and safety of a quality intervention intended to reduce hyperpolypharmacy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial allocated patients 76 years or older who used 10 or more prescription medications to a deprescribing intervention or to usual care (1:1 ratio) at an integrated health system with multiple preexisting deprescribing workflows. Data were collected from October 15, 2020, to July 29, 2022. Intervention: Physician-pharmacist collaborative drug therapy management, standard-of-care practice recommendations, shared decision-making, and deprescribing protocols administered by telephone over multiple cycles for a maximum of 180 days after allocation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points were change in the number of medications and in the prevalence of geriatric syndrome (falls, cognition, urinary incontinence, and pain) from 181 to 365 days after allocation compared with before randomization. Secondary outcomes were use of medical services and adverse drug withdrawal effects. Results: Of a random sample of 2860 patients selected for potential enrollment, 2470 (86.4%) remained eligible after physician authorization, with 1237 randomized to the intervention and 1233 to usual care. A total of 1062 intervention patients (85.9%) were reached and agreed to enroll. Demographic variables were balanced. The median age of the 2470 patients was 80 (range, 76-104) years, and 1273 (51.5%) were women. In terms of race and ethnicity, 185 patients (7.5%) were African American, 234 (9.5%) were Asian or Pacific Islander, 220 (8.9%) were Hispanic, 1574 (63.7%) were White (63.7%), and 257 (10.4%) were of other (including American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or >1 race or ethnicity) or unknown race or ethnicity. During follow-up, both the intervention and usual care groups had slight reductions in the number of medications dispensed (mean changes, -0.4 [95% CI, -0.6 to -0.2] and -0.4 [95% CI, -0.6 to -0.3], respectively), with no difference between the groups (P = .71). There were no significant changes in the prevalence of a geriatric condition in the usual care and intervention groups at the end of follow-up and no difference between the groups (baseline prevalence: 47.7% [95% CI, 44.9%-50.5%] vs 42.9% [95% CI, 40.1%-45.7%], respectively; difference-in-differences, 1.0 [95% CI, -3.5 to 5.6]; P = .65). No differences in use of medical services or adverse drug withdrawal effects were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial from an integrated care setting with various preexisting deprescribing workflows, a bundled hyperpolypharmacy deprescribing intervention was not associated with reduction in medication dispensing, prevalence of geriatric syndrome, utilization of medical services, or adverse drug withdrawal effects. Additional research is needed in less integrated settings and in more targeted populations. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05616689.

Changes in COVID-19 Vaccine Intent Among a Diverse Population of Older Adults, June 2021-February 2022.

Introduction COVID-19 vaccination rates remain suboptimal in the United States. Clinicians and policymakers need to better understand how likely vaccine-hesitant individuals are to ultimately accept vaccination and what is associated with such changes. This study's aims were to 1) describe changes between vaccine intentions and actual uptake from June 2021 through February 2022, and 2) identify modifiable factors associated with vaccine uptake among those with initial hesitancy. Methods This cohort study included a stratified random sample of adults aged 65 years and older in an integrated health care system. The survey, conducted June through August 2021, elicited intent and perceptions regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Subsequent vaccine uptake through February 2022 was analyzed using electronic health records. Results Of 1195 individuals surveyed, 66% responded; 213 reported not yet having received a COVID-19 vaccine and were further analyzed. At baseline, most individuals said they would definitely not (42%) or probably not (5%) get the COVID-19 vaccine or were not sure (26%). During follow-up, 61 individuals (29%) were vaccinated, including 19% of those who initially said they would definitely not be vaccinated. Among vaccine-hesitant individuals, the rate of vaccination was highest for those who initially considered COVID-19 less dangerous than the vaccine (46%) or named short-term side effects (36%) as their most important concern. Conclusions COVID-19 vaccine intent among older adults was malleable during the pandemic's second year, even among those who initially said they would definitely not be vaccinated. Vaccine uptake could be enhanced by increasing awareness of COVID-19 risks and by addressing vaccine side effects.

Changing Provider PSA Screening Behavior Using Best Practice Advisories: Interventional Study in a Multispecialty Group Practice.

BACKGROUND: Most guidelines recommend against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men ≥ 70 years of age. Adherence to these guidelines is variable. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of a "Best Practice Advisory" (BPA) intervention within the electronic medical record (EMR) system can alter the rate of PSA screening in men ≥ 70 years of age. DESIGN: This is an interventional study spanning the years 2013 through 2017, in men ≥ 70 years of age in Kaiser Permanente Northern California with no prior history of prostate cancer. The BPA intervention was activated in the EMR system on October 15, 2015, with no prior notice or education. SETTING: Integrated healthcare system including all Kaiser Permanente Northern California facilities. PARTICIPANTS: A population-based sample that included all male members ≥ 70 years of age without a history of prostate cancer. MAIN MEASURES: The main outcome was the rate of PSA testing in men ≥ 70 years of age. We compared the rates of PSA testing between the pre-BPA period (January 1, 2013-October 14, 2015) and the post-BPA period (October 15, 2015-December 31, 2017). An interrupted time series analysis of PSA ordering rates was performed. KEY RESULTS: Following the 2015 BPA intervention, screening rates substantially declined from 36.0 per 100 person-years to 14.9 per 100 person-years (rate ratio = 0.415; 95% CI: 0.410-0.419). The effect of the BPA was comparable among all patient races and ordering provider specialties. The interrupted time series analysis showed a rapid, large, and sustained drop in the rate of PSA ordering, and much less temporal variation in test ordering after activation of the BPA. CONCLUSION: Following activation of a BPA within the EMR, the rates of inappropriate PSA testing significantly declined by 58.5% in men ≥ 70 years of age and temporal variation was reduced.

Oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation in breast cancer multigene testing.

PURPOSE: Multigene testing for breast cancer recurrence risk became available in 2007, yet many eligible patients remain untested. This study evaluated variation in testing rates, and oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation, in a setting without financial influences on testing. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic data and oncologist surveys within Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a large integrated health care system. Analyses included all 2974 test eligible patients from 2013 to 2015, 113 oncologists, and 15 practice groups. Receipt of multigene testing was evaluated with generalized linear mixed models. RESULTS: Overall, 39% of eligible patients had multigene testing, but rates varied widely among practice groups, ranging from 24 to 48% after case mix adjustment. This 24% difference among practices was greater than the variation associated with most patient characteristics, including comorbidities and race/ethnicity, and similar to that associated with tumor size. Practice group and oncologist factors were statistically significant contributors to the variation in testing after adjusting for patient factors. Patients were more likely to be tested if they had a female oncologist (aOR 1.60, 95% CI 1.21-2.12) or were in a practice whose chief had a high testing rate (aOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.12-1.29 per 10% increase in the percent tested). CONCLUSIONS: Oncologist and leadership practices play a key role in the variation in genomic test use for cancer recurrence risk even in a healthcare system without financial barriers to testing and could be a leverage point for implementing desired practice changes for new genomic advances.