A clinical-pharmaceutical medication reconciliation with patient interview for a medication review to identify drug-related problems in elective patients during hospital admission.

Background and aim: Drug-related problems (DRPs), e.g.drug-drug interactions (DDI), can lead to adversedrug reactions (ADRs) and thus complications during hospitalization. For this reason, such DRP, DDI and ADR should be identified and characterized as early as possible during hospital admission. We aimed to perform a clinical-pharmaceutical medication reconciliation in which patient-related information was collected and compared to drug-related information in a medication review. Investigations: During a 24-week-period, we consecutively invited patients electively admitted to Urology, Otolaryngology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, General and Visceral Surgery, and Oncology Departments of a 300-bed hospital. A clinical pharmacist performed a patient interview asking for medication, ADR, and adherence. The medication reconciliation considered packages for a brown-bag analysis, medication lists, and data from the clinical information-system (CIS). In a medication review, we matched patient-related information to drug-related information from the drug label, guidelines, drug-databases and websites to identify DRPs. Results: In the study, 356 patients (median age: 58 years) taking 1,712 drugs participated. Of all patients, 7.3% reported ADR and 10.7% missing adherence. 5.3% brought packages that enabled a brown-bag analysis and 21.1% a medication list. In 76.7% of patients, information from CIS was incomplete or not up-to-date. Among the most frequently identified DRPs were "Medication without diagnosis" (31.2%) and "Inappropriate timing of administration" (11.5%). The proportion of patients affected by severe DDI ranged from 0.8%-16.6%, depending on the drug information source. Conclusions: Incomplete patient data, frequently identified DRPs and inconsistent drug-based information make pharmaceutical involvement in medication reconciliation on admission a necessity.

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.

Medication review and deprescribing in different healthcare settings: a position statement from an Italian scientific consortium.

Recent medical advancements have increased life expectancy, leading to a surge in patients affected by multiple chronic diseases and consequent polypharmacy, especially among older adults. This scenario increases the risk of drug interactions and adverse drug reactions, highlighting the need for medication review and deprescribing to reduce inappropriate medications and optimize therapeutic regimens, with the ultimate goal to improving patients' health and quality of life. This position statement from the Italian Scientific Consortium on medication review and deprescribing aims to describe key elements, strategies, tools, timing, and healthcare professionals to be involved, for the implementation of medication review and deprescribing in different healthcare settings (i.e., primary care, hospital, long-term care facilities, and palliative care). Challenges and potential solutions for the implementation of medication review and deprescribing are also discussed.

Financial impact of medication reviews by clinical pharmacists to reduce in-hospital adverse drug events: a return-on-investment analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug events contribute to rising health care costs. Clinical pharmacists can reduce their risks by identifying and solving drug-related problems (DRPs) through medication review. AIM: To develop an economic model to determine whether medication reviews performed by clinical pharmacists could lead to a reduction in health care costs associated with the prevention of potential adverse drug events. METHOD: Two pharmacists performed medication reviews during ward rounds in an internal medicine setting over one year. Avoided costs were estimated by monetizing five categories of DRPs (improper drug selection, drug interactions, untreated indications, inadequate dosages, and drug use without an indication). An expert panel assessed potential adverse drug events and their probabilities of occurrence for 20 randomly selected DRPs in each category. The costs of adverse drug events were extracted from internal hospital financial data. A partial economic study from a hospital perspective then estimated the annual costs avoided by resolving DRPs identified by 3 part-time clinical pharmacists (0.9 full-time equivalent) from 2019 to 2020. The return on investment (ROI) of medication review was calculated. RESULTS: The estimated annual avoided costs associated with the potential adverse drug events induced by 676 DRPs detected was € 304,170. The cost of a 0.9 full-time equivalent clinical pharmacist was € 112,408. Extrapolated to 1 full-time equivalent, the annual net savings was € 213,069 or an ROI of 1-1.71. Sensitivity analyses showed that the economic model was robust. CONCLUSION: This economic model revealed the positive financial impact and favorable return on investment of a medication review intervention performed by clinical pharmacists. These findings should encourage the future deployment of a pharmacist-led adverse drug events prevention program.

Taxonomy development for term standardization in activity resulting from medication review processes: a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Medication review (MR) is the systematic assessment of a patient's medications for safety and effectiveness by a healthcare professional. The language used to describe MR activity, such as stopped medicine and increased dose, should be consistent across studies to assist researchers compare how different services operate and identify their mechanism of impact. AIM: To develop an international taxonomy of standardized terms and activity definitions related to medication reviews. METHOD: This was a three-stage Delphi-based consensus study with international medication review experts. A systematic review provided MR activity terms for the survey. Experts rated their consensus on each activity term and its definition on a Likert scale and provided written feedback. The consensus was 75% panel agreement. At each stage, consensus elements were retained, and feedback was used to revise definitions. RESULTS: Seven experts were recruited for the study (response rate 15.2%) from four countries: the United Kingdom (n = 4), New Zealand (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), and Malaysia (n = 1). The following terms achieved consensus: the term Medication as a descriptor for MR terms; discontinue medication, start medication, dose increase, dose decrease, dosage form change, and medication safety and efficacy monitor to describe MR activity; Educate to describe the delivery of healthcare professionals and patients/carers education. CONCLUSION: Standardized medication review activity terms and definitions have been selected for universal adoption in all future MR research to facilitate a meaningful comparison of process evaluations within different settings.

Implementation of Pharmacist-Led Medication Review Service for Parkinson's Disease Patients Admitted for Deep Brain Stimulation.

Objective The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical impact of a specialized pharmacist-led medication assessment on the incidence of dopamine antagonists administered for patients with Parkinson's disease after deep brain stimulation (DBS). Methods This was a single-center, Institutional Review Board-approved, two-phase study with pre- and post-implementation cohorts of patients who were 18 years of age or older who underwent DBS for treatment of Parkinson's disease. The primary endpoint was the incidence of dopamine antagonists administered after DBS procedure. Secondary endpoints included the incidence of dopamine antagonists ordered; restarting home Parkinson's disease regimen; rate of tardive dyskinesia; length of hospital stay; and incidence of sitters, restraints, and medications administered for acute agitation. Statistical analysis included Fisher's exact test for categorical data, unpaired t-test for continuous data, and descriptive statistics for all other data. Results The incidence of dopamine antagonists administered was 1 (1.2%) versus 1 (25%) for the pre- and post-implementation groups, respectively (P = 0.09). Restarting of home Parkinson's disease regimen was 30 (36.1%) versus 4 (100%); P = 0.021. The average length of stay was 1.9 days versus 1.3 days. Incidence of sitters was 1 (1.2%) versus 0 (0%), and incidence of restraints was 0 (0%) versus 0 (0%). Incidence of acute agitation medications administered was 9 (10.8%) versus 0 (0%). The secondary endpoints were not significant except for the restarting of home medication regimen. Conclusion The specialized pharmacist-led medication review service identified a single incident of inappropriate medications administered for Parkinson's disease patients status post DBS. However, it did significantly increase the incidence of the restart of Parkinson's disease home regimen.

Evaluation of pharmacists' role in preoperative medication review in a Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

PURPOSE: Use of high-risk medications preoperatively may increase the incidence of postoperative complications. Available literature evaluating pharmacists' role in preoperative medication review is limited, and guidance is not currently available on which patients should have a medication review performed by a pharmacist before surgery. A preoperative rehabilitation pilot project in which clinical pharmacists reviewed medication profiles before scheduled surgeries was developed. This review aimed to evaluate pharmacists' role in reviewing medication profiles preoperatively and to identify specific patient factors that suggest a medication review is warranted. METHODS: This retrospective review utilized the electronic medical records of nonfrail adults undergoing preplanned surgeries enrolled in the pilot project from August 2021 to April 2022. Endpoints were determined using descriptive statistics and regression models. A multivariate analysis was performed evaluating high-risk medications and VIONE (Vital, Important, Optional, Not indicated, and Every medication has an indication) polypharmacy risk score. RESULTS: Forty patients were included, with at least one recommendation made in 83% of chart reviews. Many patients (95%) were taking at least one high-risk medication. Of the high-risk medication classes evaluated independently, only antiplatelets were predictive of pharmacy intervention (P = 0.01). Only high-risk medications were independently predictive of pharmacist intervention (P < 0.01) when multivariate analysis was performed. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists made a recommendation in the majority of medication reviews and were most likely to make a recommendation in patients taking high-risk medications. A larger sample size may provide more insight regarding patient-specific factors warranting a preoperative medication review.

The outcomes of considering goals of care in medication reviews for older adults: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: This is a systematic review of prescribing, clinical, patient-reported, and health utilization outcomes of goal-directed medication reviews in older adults. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and CINAHL databases to identify studies examining outcomes of goal-directed medication reviews in humans, with mean/median age ≥ 60 years and in English. RESULTS: Seventeen out of 743 articles identified were included. Whilst there were inconsistent findings regarding changes in the number of medications between groups or post-intervention in one group (n = 6 studies), studies found reductions in drug-related problems (n = 2) and potential to reduce anticholinergics and sedatives (n = 2). Two out of seven studies investigating clinical outcomes found improvements, such as reduced hospital readmissions and improved depression severity. One study found 75% of patients achieved ≥ 1 goals and another found 43% of goals were achieved at six months. Four out of five studies found significant improvements in patient-reported quality of life between groups (n = 2) or post-intervention in one group (n = 2). Both studies investigating cost-effectiveness reported the intervention was cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of positive impact on medication rationalization, quality of life and cost-effectiveness, supporting goal-directed medication reviews. Larger, longitudinal studies, exploring patient-focused outcomes may provide further insights into the ongoing impact of goal-directed medication reviews.

Effectiveness of Online Team-based Learning for Pharmacists on How to Conduct Clinical Medication Reviews for Old Patients in Japan: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of online team-based learning (TBL) and the factors influencing dropouts from online TBL for pharmacists on how to conduct clinical medication reviews for older adults. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: All participants were randomly assigned to the TBL or non-TBL group by using a random number sequence table matched by their years of experience working as a pharmacist. The primary outcome was whether the score on the team readiness assurance test (TRAT) in the TBL group differed from that on the second individual readiness assurance test (IRAT) in the non-TBL group. The secondary outcome was to identify factors contributing to dropouts from the online TBL program. RESULTS: The TRAT score in the TBL group was significantly higher than the second IRAT score in the non-TBL group during the first session (p=0.010). There were no differences in TRAT and IRAT scores between groups in two subsequent sessions. Logistic regression analysis revealed that less than 10 years of pharmacy experience was a contributor to dropouts (p=0.039), whereas experience in home-based care prevented dropouts (p=0.026) in our online TBL program. CONCLUSION: This study revealed the short-term usefulness of online TBL on medication reviews for older adults and elucidated the factors related to dropouts. Although instructors should provide positive feedback to participants with insufficient experience in pharmacy practice and home-based care, online TBL has the potential to improve educational effectiveness for community pharmacists during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical impact of medication reviews for community-dwelling patients in primary healthcare.

BACKGROUND: A high number of drug-related problems has previously been shown among community-dwelling patients in primary healthcare in Skåne County, Sweden. Medication reviews are one way to solve these problems, but their impact is largely dependent on the process. We aimed to evaluate medication reviews for community-dwelling patients regarding the clinical relevance of the pharmacists' recommendations, and their implementation by general practitioners. We also wanted to investigate if the general practitioners' tendency to act on drug-related problems was correlated to different factors of the process. METHODS: This was a cohort study, where patients in primary healthcare considered in need of a medication review were selected. Pharmacists identified drug-related problems and gave written recommendations on how to solve the problems to the general practitioner, via the medical record, and in addition in some cases via verbal communication. The clinical relevance of the recommendations was graded according to the Hatoum scale, ranging from one (adverse significance) to six (extremely significant). Descriptive statistics were used regarding the clinical relevance and the general practitioners´ tendency to act on drug-related problems. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between the tendency to act and different factors of the process. RESULTS: A total of 96.1% of the 384 assessed recommendations from the pharmacists were graded as significant or more for the patient (Hatoum grade 3 or higher). The general practitioners acted on 63.8% of the drug-related problems. Fewer recommendations per patient, as well as verbal communication in addition to written contact, significantly increased the general practitioners' tendency to act on a drug-related problem. No significant association was seen between the tendency to act and the clinical relevance of the recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The high proportion of clinically relevant recommendations from the pharmacists in this study strengthens medication reviews as an important tool for reducing drug-related problems. Verbal communication between the pharmacist and the general practitioner is important for measures to be taken. Multiple recommendations for the same patient reduced their likelihood to of being addressed by the general practitioner.

Can medication increase the risk of falls? The importance of medication review.

Falls are the second leading cause of unintentional injury deaths worldwide and are a major health issue for older people. One of the factors that can increase the risk of falls is medication. This article examines how medication can affect fall risk and how medication review can reduce the risk of falls.

Identification of Emotional Spectrums of Patients Taking an Erectile Dysfunction Medication: Ontology-Based Emotion Analysis of Patient Medication Reviews on Social Media.

BACKGROUND: Patient medication reviews on social networking sites provide valuable insights into the experiences and sentiments of individuals taking specific medications. Understanding the emotional spectrum expressed by patients can shed light on their overall satisfaction with medication treatment. This study aims to explore the emotions expressed by patients taking phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors and their impact on sentiment. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) identify the distribution of 6 Parrot emotions in patient medication reviews across different patient characteristics and PDE5 inhibitors, (2) determine the relative impact of each emotion on the overall sentiment derived from the language expressed in each patient medication review while controlling for different patient characteristics and PDE5 inhibitors, and (3) assess the predictive power of the overall sentiment in explaining patient satisfaction with medication treatment. METHODS: A data set of patient medication reviews for sildenafil, vardenafil, and tadalafil was collected from 3 popular social networking sites such as WebMD, Ask-a-Patient, and Drugs.com. The Parrot emotion model, which categorizes emotions into 6 primary classes (surprise, anger, love, joy, sadness, and fear), was used to analyze the emotional content of the reviews. Logistic regression and sentiment analysis techniques were used to examine the distribution of emotions across different patient characteristics and PDE5 inhibitors and to quantify their contribution to sentiment. RESULTS: The analysis included 3070 patient medication reviews. The most prevalent emotions expressed were joy and sadness, with joy being the most prevalent among positive emotions and sadness being the most prevalent among negative emotions. Emotion distributions varied across patient characteristics and PDE5 inhibitors. Regression analysis revealed that joy had the strongest positive impact on sentiment, while sadness had the most negative impact. The sentiment score derived from patient reviews significantly predicted patient satisfaction with medication treatment, explaining 19% of the variance (increase in R2) when controlling for patient characteristics and PDE5 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides valuable insights into the emotional experiences of patients taking PDE5 inhibitors. The findings highlight the importance of emotions in shaping patient sentiment and satisfaction with medication treatment. Understanding these emotional dynamics can aid health care providers in better addressing patient needs and improving overall patient care.

Evaluation of an enhanced service for medication review with follow up in Swiss community pharmacies: Pre-post study protocol.

BACKGROUND: In Switzerland, 20,000 people are hospitalized each year as result of drug related problems (DRPs). The sources of DRPs can be related to patients' behavior (i.e., wrong administration) or to health processes (i.e., drug-drug interaction). No community pharmacy (CP) service focus on DRPs related to patients' behavior is currently recognized or remunerated in Switzerland. A medication review with follow up (MRF) has been developed to evaluate prescription and non-prescription medication. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of MRF service for the identification and management DRPs associated to patients' behavior and to describe pharmaceutical interventions carried out through MRF. METHODS: A pre-post intervention study with a cluster design and one intervention group will be carried out in CPs in the canton of Vaud (Switzerland) for 15 months. Volunteer pharmacists will be trained on the identification and management of DRPs related to patients' behavior. After training, they will include randomly selected adults taking four or more chronic drugs prescribed for at least three months prior to recruitment. Then, they will conduct three pharmacist-patient face-to-face consultations at 6-month intervals. Tasks will be differentiated by pharmacy technician or pharmacist to triage expired medication or to manage DRPs in a structured manner, respectively. The primary outcome is the identification of DRPs associated to patients' behavior. Secondary outcomes are to assess patients' medication knowledge, number of expired medications, interventions carried out by pharmacists and pharmacists' satisfaction. The study will begin in April 2023 in 19 to 35 pharmacies that will recruit at least 162 patients. A sub analysis will be carried out for patients with 65 years old or over. CONCLUSIONS: The MRF intervention features a training designed for an enhanced evaluation of patient's behavior towards their medication. The study will allow the assessment and management of DRPs in Swiss CPs with the support of the local health authorities and pharmacist association. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05348538.

Identification of Medication-Related Risks in Bariatric Surgery Patients by Performing Structured Medication Reviews.

PURPOSE: More medication-related issues are seen with the growing demand for bariatric surgery, because of possible altered pharmacokinetics after surgery. Collaboration with a pharmacist could improve the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of pharmacotherapy in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a structured medication review to identify medication-related risks before bariatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The impact on pharmacy-led interventions of introducing a structured medication review was evaluated in a historically controlled study. In the retrospective part, we evaluated patient characteristics, medication use, and number of pre-surgery consultations with a pharmacist before the introduction of medication reviews. A flowchart was developed to detect the use of medicines with risks associated with bariatric surgery. In the prospective part, we evaluated pharmacy-led interventions after the introduction of structured medication reviews using the flowchart. Outcome effectiveness was measured through the number of pre-surgery pharmacy-led interventions. RESULTS: Before using the flowchart for screening on risk medicines, 40 (2.6%) pharmacy-led interventions were identified in 1536 patients. In the prospective group, 195 patients were included and 88 (45%) interventions were identified (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A structured medication review before bariatric surgery significantly increased the number of pharmacy-led interventions in bariatric surgery patients. This procedure will shift interventions to pre-surgery instead of post-surgery, contributing to the optimization of pharmacotherapy at an early stage.

[Polypharmacy and medication review in the context of prehabilitation]. / Polypharmazie und Medikamentencheck im Kontext der Prähabilitation.

Against the background of typical geriatric multimorbidity and with the particular vulnerability of geriatric patients, polypharmacy deserves special attention. In accordance with the guidelines, medication should not only be reviewed regularly, but also on an ad hoc basis and with each hospital stay-and also in the context of prehabilitation. Thus, not only substances that interfere with the currently planned intervention, anesthesia, or risk of bleeding should be considered, but any medication that increases common risks for geriatric patients. These include drugs that cause or increase a tendency to fall, induce delirium, or alter the comedication through potential drug-drug interactions. Measures to minimize the risk include the following: exact documentation of medications, structured and complete transfer of information, patient and family training about any side effects that may occur, a recall system for possible laboratory checks, and compliance with the instructions for taking the medication.

What makes a multidisciplinary medication review and deprescribing intervention for older people work well in primary care? A realist review and synthesis.

BACKGROUND: A third of older people take five or more regular medications (polypharmacy). Conducting medication reviews in primary care is key to identify and reduce/ stop inappropriate medications (deprescribing). Recent recommendations for effective deprescribing include shared-decision making and a multidisciplinary approach. Our aim was to understand when, why, and how interventions for medication review and deprescribing in primary care involving multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) work (or do not work) for older people. METHODS: A realist synthesis following the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards guidelines was completed. A scoping literature review informed the generation of an initial programme theory. Systematic searches of different databases were conducted, and documents screened for eligibility, with data extracted based on a Context, Mechanisms, Outcome (CMO) configuration to develop further our programme theory. Documents were appraised based on assessments of relevance and rigour. A Stakeholder consultation with 26 primary care health care professionals (HCPs), 10 patients and three informal carers was conducted to test and refine the programme theory. Data synthesis was underpinned by Normalisation Process Theory to identify key mechanisms to enhance the implementation of MDT medication review and deprescribing in primary care. FINDINGS: A total of 2821 abstracts and 175 full-text documents were assessed for eligibility, with 28 included. Analysis of documents alongside stakeholder consultation outlined 33 CMO configurations categorised under four themes: 1) HCPs roles, responsibilities and relationships; 2) HCPs training and education; 3) the format and process of the medication review 4) involvement and education of patients and informal carers. A number of key mechanisms were identified including clearly defined roles and good communication between MDT members, integration of pharmacists in the team, simulation-based training or team building training, targeting high-risk patients, using deprescribing tools and drawing on expertise of other HCPs (e.g., nurses and frailty practitioners), involving patents and carers in the process, starting with 'quick wins', offering deprescribing as 'drug holidays', and ensuring appropriate and tailored follow-up plans that allow continuity of care and management. CONCLUSION: We identified key mechanisms that could inform the design of future interventions and services that successfully embed deprescribing in primary care.

Implementation of clinical medication review in a geriatric ward to reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions among older adults.

PURPOSE: The impact of several pharmaceutical interventions to reduce the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potentially omitted medications (POMs) has been recently studied. We aimed to determine whether clinical medication review (CMR) (i.e. a systematic and patient-centred clinical assessment of all medicines currently taken by a patient) performed by a geriatrician and a pharmacist added to standard pharmaceutical care (SPC) (i.e. medication reconciliation and regular prescription review by the pharmacist) resulted in more appropriate prescribing compared to SPC among older inpatients. METHODS: A retrospective observational single-centre study was conducted in a French geriatric ward. Six criteria for appropriate prescribing were chosen: the number of PIMs and POMs as defined by the STOPP/STARTv2 list, the total number of drugs prescribed, the number of administrations per day and the number of psychotropic and anticholinergic drugs. These criteria were compared between CMR and SPC group using linear and logistic regression models weighted on propensity scores. RESULTS: There were 137 patients included, 66 in the CMR group and 71 in the SPC group. The mean age was 87 years, the sex ratio was 0.65, the mean number of drugs prescribed was 9, the mean MMSE was 21 and at admission 242 POMs, and 363 PIMs were prescribed. Clinical medication review did not reduce the number of PIMs at discharge compared to SPC (beta = - 0.13 [- 0.84; 0.57], p = 0.71) nor did it reduce the number of drugs prescribed (p = 0.10), the number of psychotropic drugs (p = 0.17) or the anticholinergic load (p = 0.87). Clinical medication review resulted in more POMs being prescribed than in standard pharmaceutical care (beta = - 0.39 [- 0.72; - 0.06], p = 0.02). Cardiology POMs were more implemented in the medication review group (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Clinical medication review did not reduce the number of PIMs but helped clinicians introduce underused drugs, especially cardiovascular drugs, which are known to be associated with morbidity and mortality risk reduction.

CompreHensive geriAtRician-led MEdication Review (CHARMER): protocol for a feasibility study of a hospital deprescribing behaviour change intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Over 50% of older adults are prescribed a medicine where the risk of harm outweighs the chances of benefit. During a hospital admission, older adults and carers expect medicines to be reviewed for appropriateness and any inappropriate medicines proactively deprescribed. While the principle of proactive deprescribing is an expectation of good prescribing practice, it is yet to become routine. The CompreHensive geriAtRician-led MEdication Review (CHARMER) study aims to develop and test a five-component behaviour change intervention to equip geriatricians and pharmacists to proactively deprescribe inappropriate medicines with older adults in hospital. This study aims to test the feasibility and acceptability of study processes and CHARMER implementation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A two-arm purposive allocation feasibility study is being undertaken at four acute hospitals in England, UK (three intervention and one control). The target sample is 400 patients across all hospitals. Primary outcome measures are: (1) participant recruitment rate and (2) participant attrition rate. Secondary outcome measures are: (1) hospital readmission rate; (2) mortality rate and (3) quality of life. Quantitative data will be checked for completeness and quality, and practitioner and patient demographics descriptively analysed. We will undertake a rapid qualitative analysis on observations, interviews and study meeting minutes data. A subsequent thematic analysis will be undertaken with codes mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework and Normalisation Process Theory. Triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data will be undertaken. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from Wales Research Ethics Committee 1 (IRAS ID 312494) and study approval from the Health Research Authority (22/WA/0087). Informed consent will be sought from all hospital staff involved in data collection activities and for patients involved in enhanced data collection activities. The findings of this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11899506.

Frequency and impact of medication reviews for people aged 65 years or above in UK primary care: an observational study using electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: Medication reviews in primary care provide an opportunity to review and discuss the safety and appropriateness of a person's medicines. However, there is limited evidence about access to and the impact of routine medication reviews for older adults in the general population, particularly in the UK. We aimed to quantify the proportion of people aged 65 years and over with a medication review recorded in 2019 and describe changes in the numbers and types of medicines prescribed following a review. METHODS: We used anonymised primary care electronic health records from the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD GOLD) to define a population of people aged 65 years or over in 2019. We counted people with a medication review record in 2019 and used Cox regression to estimate associations between demographic characteristics, diagnoses, and prescribed medicines and having a medication review. We used linear regression to compare the number of medicines prescribed as repeat prescriptions in the three months before and after a medication review. Specifically, we compared the 'prescription count' - the maximum number of different medicines with overlapping prescriptions people had in each period. RESULTS: Of 591,726 people prescribed one or more medicines at baseline, 305,526 (51.6%) had a recorded medication review in 2019. Living in a care home (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval 1.40-1.62), medication review in the previous year (1.83, 1.69-1.98), and baseline prescription count (e.g. 5-9 vs 1 medicine 1.41, 1.37-1.46) were strongly associated with having a medication review in 2019. Overall, the prescription count tended to increase after a review (mean change 0.13 medicines, 95% CI 0.12-0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Although medication reviews were commonly recorded for people aged 65 years or over, there was little change overall in the numbers and types of medicines prescribed following a review. This study did not examine whether the prescriptions were appropriate or other metrics, such as dose or medicine changes within the same class. However, by examining the impact of medication reviews before the introduction of structured medication review requirements in England in 2020, it provides a useful benchmark which these new reviews can be compared with.