An exploratory graphical analysis of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale pre- and post-treatment using pooled antidepressant trial secondary data.

BACKGROUND: The 10-item Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is a commonly used measure of depression in antidepressant clinical trials. Numerous studies have adopted classical test theory perspectives to assess the psychometric properties of this scale, finding generally positive results. However, its network configural structure and stability is unexplored across different time-points and treatment groups. AIMS: To assess the network structure and stability of the MADRS in clinical settings pre- and post-treatment, and to determine a configurally invariant and stable model across time-points and treatment groups (placebo and intervention). METHOD: Individual participant data for 6440 participants from 14 clinical trials of major depressive disorder was obtained from the data repository Vivli.org. Exploratory Graphical Analysis (EGA) was used to identify empirical models pre-treatment (baseline) and post-treatment (8-week outcome). Bootstrapping techniques were applied to obtain optimised configurally invariant models. RESULTS: Empirical models presented with performance issues at baseline and for the placebo group at outcome. An abbreviated 8-item single-community model was found to be stable and configurally invariant across time-points and treatment groups. Symptoms such as low mood and lassitude showed most centrality across all models. LIMITATIONS: Metric invariance could not be explored due to research environment limitations. CONCLUSIONS: An 8-item one-community variant of the MADRS may provide optimal performance when conducting network analyses of antidepressant clinical trial outcomes. Findings suggest that interventions targeting low mood and lassitude might be most efficacious in treating depression among clinical trial participants. Further considerations of the potential impact on trial design and analysis should be explored.

Emergency admission predictive risk stratification models: assessment of implementation consequences (PRISMATIC 2): protocol for a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Emergency admissions are costly, increasingly numerous, and associated with adverse patient outcomes. Policy responses have included the widespread introduction of emergency admission risk stratification (EARS) tools in primary care. These tools generate scores that predict patients' risk of emergency hospital admission and can be used to support targeted approaches to improve care and reduce admissions. However, the impact of EARS is poorly understood and there may be unintended consequences. AIM: To assess effects, mechanisms, costs, and patient and healthcare professionals' views related to the introduction of EARS tools in England. DESIGN & SETTING: Quasi-experimental mixed methods design using anonymised routine data and qualitative methods. METHOD: We will apply multiple interrupted time series analysis to data, aggregated at former Clinical Commissioning Group level, to look at changes in emergency admission and other healthcare use following EARS introduction across England. We will investigate GP decision-making at practice level using linked general practice and secondary care data to compare case-mix, demographics, indicators of condition severity and frailty associated with emergency admissions before and after EARS introduction. We will undertake interviews (n~48) with GPs and healthcare staff to understand how patient care may have changed. We will conduct focus groups (n=2) and interviews (n~16) with patients to explore how they perceive that communication of individual risk scores might affect their experiences and health seeking behaviours. CONCLUSION: Findings will provide policymakers, healthcare professionals, and patients, with a better understanding of the effects, costs and stakeholder perspectives related to the introduction of EARS tools.

The Influence of Cough Reflex Testing on Patient Management.

PURPOSE: Cough reflex testing (CRT) is an adjunct to the clinical swallowing evaluation (CSE), providing information on patients' risk of silent aspiration. CRT has been shown to influence diet recommendations, but in previous work, the many varied patient characteristics are not controlled. Therefore, the specific role of CRT results in these decisions remains unclear as this relationship has not been directly assessed. METHOD: An online survey was sent to speech language therapists working in dysphagia. Two patient cases were presented that differed only by the presence of risk factors for the development of aspiration pneumonia. For each patient case, there were three assessment scenarios: CSE information only, CSE information with a "pass" CRT result, and CSE information with a "fail" CRT result. Clinicians outlined their patient management plans for each of the six scenarios. RESULTS: Ninety-seven data sets were used in the final analysis. A "fail" result was found to lead to the most restrictive patient management. Decisions made when provided with only CSE information were very similar to decisions made for a CSE with a "pass" result. Aspiration pneumonia risk factors were shown to influence decision making, with the low-risk patient more likely to be recommended a less restrictive diet. CONCLUSIONS: When information was available regarding silent aspiration risk, clinicians factored the results into their decision making. However, in the absence of a CRT result, airway sensation was assumed to be intact in the absence of information. This finding warrants further investigation given the impact this assumption may have on a patient's pulmonary health.

Cost effectiveness of a GP delivered medication review to reduce polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients with multimorbidity in Irish primary care: the SPPiRE cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the cost effectiveness of deprescribing in multimorbidity is limited. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost effectiveness of a general practitioner (GP) delivered, individualised medication review to reduce polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients with multimorbidity in Irish primary care. METHODS: Within trial economic evaluation, from a healthcare perspective and based on a cluster randomised controlled trial with a 6 month follow up and 403 patients (208 Intervention and 195 Control) recruited between April 2017 and December 2019. Intervention GPs used the SPPiRE website which contained educational materials and a template to support a web-based individualised medication review. Control GPs delivered usual care. Incremental costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs) generated using the EQ-5D-5L instrument, and expected cost effectiveness were estimated using multilevel modelling and multiple imputation techniques. Uncertainty was explored using parametric, deterministic and probabilistic methods. RESULTS: On average, the SPPiRE intervention was dominant over usual care, with non-statistically significant mean cost savings of €410 (95% confidence interval (CI): - 2211, 1409) and mean health gains of 0.014 QALYs (95% CI - 0.011, 0.039). At cost effectiveness threshold values of €20,000 and €45,000 per QALY, the probability of SPPiRE being cost effective was 0.993 and 0.988. Results were sensitive to missing data and data collection period. CONCLUSIONS: The study observed a pattern towards dominance for the SPPiRE intervention, with high expected cost effectiveness. Notably, observed differences in costs and outcomes were consistent with chance, and missing data and related uncertainty was non trivial. The cost effectiveness evidence may be considered promising but equivocal. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: 12752680, 20th October 2016.

Shared decision-making interventions in the choice of antipsychotic prescription in people living with psychosis (SHAPE): Protocol for a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) has yet to be successfully adopted into routine use in psychiatric settings amongst people living with severe mental illnesses. Suboptimal rates of SDM are particularly prominent amongst patients with psychotic illnesses during antipsychotic treatment choices. Many interventions have been assessed for their efficacy in improving SDM within this context, although results have been variable and inconsistent. AIMS: To generate an in-depth understanding of how, why, for whom, and to what extent interventions facilitating the application of SDM during antipsychotic treatment choices work and the impact of contextual factors on intervention effectiveness. METHODS: This review will use realist review methodology to provide a causal understanding of how and why interventions work when implementing SDM during antipsychotic treatment choices. The cohort of interest will be those experiencing psychosis where ongoing treatment with an antipsychotic is clinically indicated. The review will take place over five stages; (1) Locating existing theories, (2) Searching for evidence, (3) Selecting articles, (4) Extracting and organising data and (5) Synthesizing evidence and drawing conclusions. An understanding of how and why interventions work will be achieved by developing realist programme theories on intervention effectiveness through iterative literature reviews and engaging with various stakeholder groups, including patient, clinician and carer representatives. DISCUSSION: This is the first realist review aiming to identify generative mechanisms explaining how and why successful interventions aimed at improving SDM within the parameters outlined work and in which contexts desired outcomes are most likely to be achieved. Review findings will include suggestions for clinicians, policy and decision-makers about the most promising interventions to pursue and their ideal attributes.

Stakeholder perceptions of and attitudes towards problematic polypharmacy and prescribing cascades: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Problematic polypharmacy is the prescribing of five or more medications potentially inappropriately. Unintentional prescribing cascades represent an under-researched aspect of problematic polypharmacy and occur when an adverse drug reaction (ADR) is misinterpreted as a new symptom resulting in the initiation of a new medication. The aim of this study was to elicit key stakeholders' perceptions of and attitudes towards problematic polypharmacy, with a focus on prescribing cascades. METHODS: qualitative one-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with predefined key stakeholder groups. Inductive thematic analysis was employed. RESULTS: Thirty-one stakeholders were interviewed: six patients, two carers, seven general practitioners, eight pharmacists, four hospital doctors, two professional organisation representatives and two policymakers. Three main themes were identified: (i) ADRs and prescribing cascades-a necessary evil. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) expressed concern that experiencing an ADR would negatively impact patients' confidence in their doctor. However, patients viewed ADRs pragmatically as an unpredictable risk. (ii) Balancing the risk/benefit tipping point. The complexity of prescribing decisions in the context of polypharmacy made balancing this tipping point challenging. Consequently, HCPs avoided medication changes. (iii) The minefield of medication reconciliation. Stakeholders, including patients and carers, viewed medication reconciliation as a perilous activity due to systemic communication deficits. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders believed that at a certain depth of polypharmacy, the risk that a new symptom is being caused by an existing medication becomes incalculable. Therefore, in the absence of harm, medication changes were avoided. However, medication reconciliation post hospital discharge compelled prescribing decisions and was seen as a high-risk activity by stakeholders.

Evaluating the psychometric structure of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression pre- and post-treatment in antidepressant randomised trials: Secondary analysis of 6843 individual participants from 20 trials.

BACKGROUND: The 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) is the most popular depression measure in antidepressant clinical trials. Prior evidence indicates poor replicability and inconsistent factorial structure. This has not been studied in pooled randomised trial data, nor has a psychometrically optimal model been developed. AIMS: To examine the psychometric properties of the HRSD-17 for pre-treatment and post-treatment clinical trial data in a large pooled database of antidepressant randomised controlled trial participants, and to determine an optimal abbreviated version. METHOD: Data for 6843 participants were obtained from the data repository Vivli.org and randomly split into groups for exploratory (n = 3421) and confirmatory (n = 3422) factor analysis. Invariance methods were used to assess potential sex differences. RESULTS: The HRSD-17 was psychometrically sub-optimal and non-invariant for all models. High item variances and low variance explained suggested redundancy in each model. EFA failed at baseline and produced four item models for outcome groups (five for placebo-outcome), which were metric but not scalar invariant. CONCLUSIONS: In antidepressant trial data, the HRSD-17 was psychometrically inadequate and scores were not sex invariant. Neither full nor abbreviated HRSD models are suitable for use in clinical trial settings and the HRSD's status as the gold standard should be reconsidered.

Thematic analysis of Prevention of Future Death reports for suicide: January 2021 to October 2022.

BACKGROUND: Suicide prevention remains a high priority topic across government and the National Health Service (NHS). Prevention of Future Death (PFD) reports are produced by coroners to highlight concerns that should be addressed by organisations to prevent future deaths in similar circumstances. OBJECTIVE: This research aimed to understand themes from concerns raised in PFD reports for deaths from suicide to inform future policies and strategies for preventing suicide. METHODS: We employed a retrospective case series design to analyse PFD reports categorised as suicide using qualitative inductive thematic analysis. Primary themes and subthemes were extracted from coroners' concerns. Following theme extraction, the number of concerns coded to these themes across reports and the frequency of recipient organisation being named as addressee on these reports were assessed as primary outcomes. FINDINGS: 12 primary themes and 83 subthemes were identified from 164 reports (4% of all available reports). The NHS was the most frequent recipient of these reports, followed by government departments. Coroners raised issues around processes within or between organisations and difficulties accessing services. The most common concerns fell under the primary theme 'processes' (142 mentions), followed by 'access to services' (84 mentions). The most frequent subthemes were 'current training not adequate' (38 mentions) and 'inadequate communication between services' (35 mentions). CONCLUSIONS: Our results specify areas where review, improvement and policy development are required to prevent future suicide deaths occurring in similar circumstances. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These themes highlight concerns across current care and service provision where reform is required for suicide prevention.

Phencyclidine Disrupts Neural Coordination and Cognitive Control by Dysregulating Translation.

Background: Phencyclidine (PCP) causes psychosis, is abused with increasing frequency, and was extensively used in antipsychotic drug discovery. PCP discoordinates hippocampal ensemble action potential discharge and impairs cognitive control in rats, but how this uncompetitive NMDA receptor (NMDAR) antagonist impairs cognition remains unknown. Methods: The effects of PCP were investigated on hippocampal CA1 ensemble action potential discharge in vivo in urethane-anesthetized rats and during awake behavior in mice, on synaptic responses in ex vivo mouse hippocampus slices, in mice on a hippocampus-dependent active place avoidance task that requires cognitive control, and on activating the molecular machinery of translation in acute hippocampus slices. Mechanistic causality was assessed by comparing the PCP effects with the effects of inhibitors of protein synthesis, group I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR1/5), and subunit-selective NMDARs. Results: Consistent with ionotropic actions, PCP discoordinated CA1 ensemble action potential discharge. PCP caused hyperactivity and impaired active place avoidance, despite the rodents having learned the task before PCP administration. Consistent with metabotropic actions, PCP exaggerated protein synthesis-dependent DHPG-induced mGluR1/5-stimulated long-term synaptic depression. Pretreatment with anisomycin or the mGluR1/5 antagonist MPEP, both of which repress translation, prevented PCP-induced discoordination and the cognitive and sensorimotor impairments. PCP as well as the NR2A-containing NMDAR antagonist NVP-AAM077 unbalanced translation that engages the Akt, mTOR (mechanistic target of rapamycin), and 4EBP1 translation machinery and increased protein synthesis, whereas the NR2B-containing antagonist Ro25-6981 did not. Conclusions: PCP dysregulates translation, acting through NR2A-containing NMDAR subtypes, recruiting mGluR1/5 signaling pathways, and leading to neural discoordination that is central to the cognitive and sensorimotor impairments.

Risk and protective factors for suicidality among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) young people, from countries with a high global acceptance index (GAI), within the context of the socio-ecological model: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) young people experience higher prevalence rates of suicidality than their heterosexual and/or cisgender peers. However, there is limited research that can inform suicide prevention efforts. Our aim was to synthesize quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research on risk and protective factors among LGBTQ+ young people, from countries with a high Global Acceptance Index. METHODS: A scoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage framework, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews protocol. Five databases and grey literature were searched for relevant studies. Identified factors were clustered by thematic type, according to the socio-ecological model to identify empirical trends and knowledge gaps. The mixed methods appraisal tool was used for quality assessment of studies. RESULTS: Sixty-six studies met our inclusion criteria. Overall, 59 unique risk factors and 37 unique protective factors were identified. Key risk factors include past suicidality, adverse childhood experiences, internalized queerphobia, minority stress, interpersonal violence, bullying, familial conflict, and anti-LGBTQ+ policies/legislation. Key protective factors include self-affirming strategies, adult/peer support, at-school safety, access to inclusive healthcare, family connectedness, positive coming out experiences, gender-affirming services and LGBTQ+ inclusive policies and legislation. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our findings affirm that multiple risk and protective factors, at all levels of the socio-ecological model, interact in complex, unique and diverse ways upon suicidality among LGBTQ+ young people. Implications for suicide prevention are discussed. Further empirical studies are required, particularly at the communities, policies, and societal levels of the socio-ecological model, and these studies should include a focus on protective factors and significant within-group differences.

Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing and Potential Prescribing Omissions and Their Association with Adverse Drug Reaction-Related Hospital Admissions.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) and their association with ADR-related hospital admissions in patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted acutely to the hospital. METHODS: Information on medications and morbidities was extracted from the Adverse Drug Reactions in an Ageing Population (ADAPT) cohort (N = 798: N = 361 ADR-related admissions; 437 non-ADR-related admissions). PIP and PPOs were assessed using Beers Criteria 2019 and STOPP/START version 2. Multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratios (aOR), 95%CI) was used to examine the association between PIP, PPOs and ADR-related admissions, adjusting for covariates (age, gender, comorbidity, polypharmacy). RESULTS: In total, 715 (90%; 95% CI 87-92%) patients had ≥1 Beers Criteria, 555 (70%; 95% CI 66-73%) had ≥ 1 STOPP criteria and 666 patients (83%; 95% CI 81-86%) had ≥ 1 START criteria. Being prescribed at least one Beers (aOR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.00-2.77), or meeting STOPP (aOR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.79-1.45) or START (aOR = 0.72; 95%CI = 0.50-1.06) criteria or the number of PIP/PPO criteria met was not significantly associated with ADR-related admissions. Patients prescribed certain drug classes (e.g., antiplatelet agents, diuretics) per individual PIP criteria were more likely to have an ADR-related admission. CONCLUSION: There was a high prevalence of PIP and PPOs in this cohort but no association with ADR-related admissions.

Prescribing cascades in ambulatory care: A structured synthesis of evidence.

The strength of evidence for specific ambulatory care prescribing cascades, in which a marker drug is used to treat an adverse event caused by an index drug, has not been well characterized. To perform a structured, systematic, and transparent review of the evidence supporting ambulatory care prescribing cascades. Ninety-four potential prescribing cascades identified through a previously published systematic review. Systematic search of the literature to further characterize prescribing cascades. (1) Grading of evidence based on observational studies investigating associations between index and marker drugs, including: Level I-strong evidence [i.e. multiple high-quality studies]; Level II-moderate evidence [i.e. single high-quality study]; Level III-fair evidence [no high-quality studies but one or more moderate-quality studies]; and Level IV-poor evidence [other]. (2) Listing of the adverse event associated with the index drug in the product's United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) label. (3) Synthesis of the evidence supporting mechanisms linking index drugs and associated adverse events. Of 99 potential cascades, 94 were supported by one or more confirmatory observational studies and were therefore included in this review. The 94 cascades related to 30 types of adverse drug reactions affecting 10 different anatomic/physiologic systems and were investigated by a total of 88 confirmatory studies, including prescription sequential symmetry analysis (n = 51), cohort (n = 30), and case-control (n = 7) studies. Overall, the evidence from observational studies was strong for 18 (19.1%) prescribing cascades, moderate for 61 (64.9%), fair for 13 (13.8%), and poor for 2 (2.1%). Although the evidence supporting mechanisms that link index drugs and associated adverse events was variable, FDA labels included information about the adverse event associated with the index drug for most (n = 86) but not all of the 94 prescribing cascades. Although we identified 18 of 94 prescribing cascades supported by strong clinical evidence and most adverse events associated with index drugs are included in FDA label, the evidentiary basis for prescribing cascades varies, with many requiring further evidence of clinical relevance.

In the thick of it: A commentary on the strength of evidence for thickened fluids.

Purpose: The efficacy of thickened fluids for individuals with dysphagia has come under increasing scrutiny among healthcare professionals. This commentary provides a critical appraisal of the research evidence and presents a balanced argument on the benefits and limitations of thickened fluids in dysphagia management. By doing so, we aim to engage the readership to think critically about this controversial topic and make informed, patient-centered decisions regarding the use of thickened fluids in dysphagia management.Result/Conclusion: We argue that, while the research evidence for the use of thickened fluids in dysphagia management continues to grow, perhaps our problem lies in trying to find one pure answer-to thicken or not to thicken. We encourage clinicians to move past arguments about the controversies of thickened fluids and, rather, use the current evidence base, including research evidence, clinical expertise, and patient preferences to support individuals with dysphagia to make informed choices about their oral intake, in the short and long term.

Clinician consensus on "Inappropriate" presentations to the Emergency Department in the Better Data, Better Planning (BDBP) census: a cross-sectional multi-centre study of emergency department utilisation in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Utilisation of the Emergency Department (ED) for non-urgent care increases demand for services, therefore reducing inappropriate or avoidable attendances is an important area for intervention in prevention of ED crowding. This study aims to develop a consensus between clinicians across care settings about the "appropriateness" of attendances to the ED in Ireland. METHODS: The Better Data, Better Planning study was a multi-centre, cross-sectional study investigating factors influencing ED utilisation in Ireland. Data was compiled in patient summary files which were assessed for measures of appropriateness by an academic General Practitioner (GP) and academic Emergency Medicine Consultant (EMC) National Panel. In cases where consensus was not reached charts were assessed by an Independent Review Panel (IRP). At each site all files were autonomously assessed by local GP-EMC panels. RESULTS: The National Panel determined that 11% (GP) to 38% (EMC) of n = 306 lower acuity presentations could be treated by a GP within 24-48 h (k = 0.259; p < 0.001) and that 18% (GP) to 35% (EMC) of attendances could be considered "inappropriate" (k = 0.341; p < 0.001). For attendances deemed "appropriate" the admission rate was 47% compared to 0% for "inappropriate" attendees. There was no consensus on 45% of charts (n = 136). Subset analysis by the IRP determined that consensus for appropriate attendances ranged from 0 to 59% and for inappropriate attendances ranged from 0 to 29%. For the Local Panel review (n = 306) consensus on appropriateness ranged from 40 to 76% across ED sites. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary clinicians agree that "inappropriate" use of the ED in Ireland is an issue. However, obtaining consensus on appropriateness of attendance is challenging and there was a significant cohort of complex heterogenous presentations where agreement could not be reached by clinicians in this study. This research again demonstrates the complexity of ED crowding, the introduction of evidence-based care pathways targeting avoidable presentations may serve to alleviate the problem in our EDs.

The effects of advanced factor analysis approaches on outcomes in randomised trials for depression: protocol for secondary analysis of individual participant data.

BACKGROUND: Modern psychometric methods make it possible to eliminate nonperforming items and reduce measurement error. Application of these methods to existing outcome measures can reduce variability in scores, and may increase treatment effect sizes in depression treatment trials. AIMS: We aim to determine whether using confirmatory factor analysis techniques can provide better estimates of the true effects of treatments, by conducting secondary analyses of individual patient data from randomised trials of antidepressant therapies. METHOD: We will access individual patient data from antidepressant treatment trials through Clinicalstudydatarequest.com and Vivli.org, specifically targeting studies that used the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) as the outcome measure. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic approaches will be used to determine pre-treatment (baseline) and post-treatment models of depression, in terms of the number of factors and weighted scores of each item. Differences in the derived factor scores between baseline and outcome measurements will yield an effect size for factor-informed depression change. The difference between the factor-informed effect size and each original trial effect size, calculated with total HRSD-17 scores, will be determined, and the differences modelled with meta-analytic approaches. Risk differences for proportions of patients who achieved remission will also be evaluated. Furthermore, measurement invariance methods will be used to assess potential gender differences. CONCLUSIONS: Our approach will determine whether adopting advanced psychometric analyses can improve precision and better estimate effect sizes in antidepressant treatment trials. The proposed methods could have implications for future trials and other types of studies that use patient-reported outcome measures.

GP preferences for, access to, and use of evidence in clinical practice: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: GPs aim to provide patient-centred care combining clinical evidence, clinical judgement, and patient priorities. Despite a recognition of the need to translate evidence to support patient care, barriers exist to the use of evidence in practice. AIM: To ascertain the needs and preferences of GPs regarding evidence-based guidance to support patient care. The study also aimed to prioritise content and optimise structure and dissemination of future evidence-based guidance. DESIGN & SETTING: This was a convergent parallel mixed-methods study in collaboration with the national GP professional body in the Republic of Ireland (Irish College of General Practitioners [ICGP]). Quantitative and qualitative findings were integrated at the interpretive level. METHOD: A national GP survey was administered via the ICGP (December 2020) and seven GP focus groups were undertaken (April-May 2021). RESULTS: Of 3496 GPs, a total of 509 responders (14.6%) completed the survey and 40 GP participants took part in focus groups. Prescribing updates, interpretation of test results, chronic disease management, and older person care were the preferred topics for future evidence-based guidance. GPs reported that they required rapid access to up-to-date and relevant evidence summaries online for use in clinical practice. Access to more comprehensive reviews for the purposes of continuing education and teaching was also a priority. Multimodal forms of dissemination were preferred to increase uptake of evidence in practice. CONCLUSION: GPs indicated that rapid access to up-to-date, summarised evidence-based resources, available from their professional organisation, is preferred. Evidence should reflect the disease burden of the population and involve multifaceted dissemination approaches.

The impact of lidocaine plaster prescribing reduction strategies: A comparison of two national health services in Europe.

AIMS: In 2017, two distinct interventions were implemented in Ireland and England to reduce prescribing of lidocaine medicated plasters. In Ireland, restrictions on reimbursement were introduced through implementation of an application system for reimbursement. In England, updated guidance on items which should not be routinely prescribed in primary care, including lidocaine plasters, was published. This study aims to compare how the interventions impacted prescribing of lidocaine plasters in these countries. METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time-series study using general practice data. For Ireland, monthly dispensing data (2015-2019) from the means-tested General Medical Services (GMS) scheme was used. For England, data covered all patients. Outcomes were the rate of dispensings, quantity and costs of lidocaine plasters, and we modelled level and trend changes from the first full month of the policy/guidance change. RESULTS: Ireland had higher rates of lidocaine dispensings compared to England throughout the study period; this was 15.22/1000 population immediately pre-intervention, and there was equivalent to a 97.2% immediate reduction following the intervention. In England, the immediate pre-intervention dispensing rate was 0.36/1000, with an immediate reduction of 0.0251/1000 (a 5.8% decrease), followed by a small but significant decrease in the monthly trend relative to the pre-intervention trend of 0.0057 per month. CONCLUSIONS: Among two different interventions aiming to decrease low-value lidocaine plaster prescribing, there was a substantially larger impact in Ireland of reimbursement restriction compared to issuing guidance in England. However, this is in the context of much higher baseline rates of use in Ireland compared to England.

Exploring the Multidimensional Relationship Between Medication Beliefs and Adherence to Medications Among Older Adults Living With Multimorbidity Using Polynomial Regression: An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: People living with multimorbidity may hold complex beliefs about medicines, potentially influencing adherence. Polynomial regression offers a novel approach to examining the multidimensional relationship between medication beliefs and adherence, overcoming limitations associated with difference scores. PURPOSE: To explore the multidimensional relationship between medication beliefs and adherence among people living with multimorbidity. METHODS: Secondary analysis was conducted using observational data from a cohort of older adults living with ≥2 chronic conditions, recruited from 15 family practices in Ireland in 2010 (n = 812) and followed up in 2012 (n = 515). Medication beliefs were measured with the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire-Specific. Adherence was assessed with the medication possession ratio using prescription data from the national primary care reimbursement service. Polynomial regression was used to explore the best-fitting multidimensional models for the relationship between (i) beliefs and adherence at baseline, and (ii) beliefs at baseline and adherence at follow-up. RESULTS: Confirmatory polynomial regression rejected the difference-score model, and exploratory polynomial regression indicated quadratic models for both analyses. Reciprocal effects were present in both analyses (slope [Analysis 1]: ß = 0.08, p = .007; slope [Analysis 2]: ß = 0.07, p = .044), indicating that adherence was higher when necessity beliefs were high and concern beliefs were low. Nonreciprocal effects were also present in both analyses (slope [Analysis 1]: ß = 0.05, p = .006; slope [Analysis 2]: ß = 0.04, p = .043), indicating that adherence was higher when both necessity and concern beliefs were high. CONCLUSIONS: Among people living with multimorbidity, there is evidence that the relationship between medication beliefs and adherence is multidimensional. Attempts to support adherence should consider the combined role of necessity and concern beliefs.

When people live with multiple ongoing health conditions, they might have complex beliefs about their prescribed medicines. These beliefs could relate to the perceived necessity of medicines (necessity beliefs) and perceived concerns about medicines (concern beliefs). This study aimed to explore how necessity and concern beliefs, in combination, relate to the extent to which people living with multiple ongoing conditions take their medicines as prescribed. The study analyzed an existing dataset that included 812 older adults recruited via family practice settings in Ireland in 2010. Of these, 515 people were followed up again in 2012. All participants were living with at least two ongoing health conditions. Participants self-reported their medication-related necessity and concern beliefs by completing a questionnaire. Their level of medication taking was calculated using pharmacy records. The results showed that having a combination of high necessity beliefs and low concern beliefs was related to higher levels of medication taking than having a combination of low necessity beliefs and high concern beliefs. Having a combination of high necessity beliefs and high concern beliefs was related to higher levels of medication taking than having a combination of low necessity beliefs and low concern beliefs. Attempts to support patients to take their medicines should consider the combined role of their necessity and concern beliefs on behavior.

Association between patient attitudes towards deprescribing and subsequent prescription changes.

Deprescribing is an essential component of safe prescribing, especially for people with higher levels of polypharmacy. Identifying individuals prepared to consider medicine changes may facilitate deprescribing-orientated reviews. We aimed to explore the relationship between revised patients' attitudes towards deprescribing (rPATD) scores and medication changes in older people prescribed ≥15 medicines. A secondary analysis of rPATD scores and prescription data from a cluster randomised controlled trial of a GP-delivered, deprescribing-orientated medication review was conducted. The association between number of medicines stopped, started and changed and baseline rPATD scores was assessed using Poisson regression, adjusting for patient age, gender, study group allocation, baseline number of medicines and effects of clustering. Participants (n = 404) had a mean age of 76.4 years and were prescribed a mean of 17.1 medicines at baseline. Willingness to stop a medicine was associated with higher rates of both deprescribing (IRR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.06-1.84) and initiating medicines (IRR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.09-1.88). Satisfaction with current medicines was associated with a lower rate of deprescribing (IRR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.57-0.85). The rPATD questionnaire could be used as part of a deprescribing intervention to identify participants who may be prepared to engage in deprescribing, enabling more efficient use of clinician time during complex consultations.