Prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy among adults and older adults: a systematic review.

Multimorbidity (multiple conditions) and polypharmacy (multiple medications) are increasingly common, yet there is a need to better understand the prevalence of co-occurrence. In this systematic review, we examined the prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy among adults (≥18 years) and older adults (≥65 years) in clinical and community settings. Six electronic databases were searched, and 87 studies were retained after two levels of screening. Most studies focused on adults 65 years and older and were done in population-based community settings. Although the operational definitions of multimorbidity and polypharmacy varied across studies, consistent cut-points (two or more conditions and five or more medications) were used across most studies. In older adult samples, the prevalence of multimorbidity ranged from 4·8% to 93·1%, while the prevalence of polypharmacy ranged from 2·6% to 86·6%. High heterogeneity between studies indicates the need for more consistent reporting of specific lists of conditions and medications used in operational definitions.

Cost-Consequence Analysis of Deprescribing to Optimize Health Outcomes for Frail Older People: A Within-Trial Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The structured, clinically supervised withdrawal of medicines, known as deprescribing, is one strategy to address inappropriate polypharmacy. This study aimed to evaluate the costs and consequences of deprescribing in frail older people living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) in Australia. DESIGN: A within-trial cost-consequence analysis of a deprescribing intervention-Opti-Med. The Opti-Med double-blind randomized controlled trial of deprescribing included 3 groups: blinded control, blinded intervention, and an open intervention group. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen RACFs in Western Australia and New South Wales. Participants were 303 older people living in participating RACFs from March 2014 to February 2019. METHODS: Analysis was conducted from the health sector perspective. Health economic outcomes assessed include cost saved from deprescribed medicines and the incremental quality-adjusted life-years. Costs were presented in 2022 Australian dollars. RESULTS: The total cost of the Opti-Med intervention was $239.13 per participant. The costs saved through deprescribed medicines over 12 months after adjusting for mortality within the trial period was $328.90 per participant in the blinded intervention group and $164.00 per participant in the open intervention group. On average, the cost of the intervention was more than offset by the cost saved from deprescribed medicines. Extrapolating these findings to the Australian population suggests a potential net cost saving of about $1 to $16 million per annum for the health system nationally. The incremental quality-adjusted life-years were very similar across the 3 groups within the trial period. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Deprescribing for frail older people living in RACFs can be a cost-saving intervention without reducing the quality of life. Systemwide implementation of deprescribing across RACFs in Australia has the potential to improve health care delivery through the cost savings, which could be reapplied to further optimize care within RACFs.

The Drug Burden Index and Level of Frailty as Determinants of Healthcare Costs in a Cohort of Older Frail Adults in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty is common in older people and is associated with increased use of healthcare services and ongoing use of multiple medications. This study provides insights into the healthcare cost structure of a frail group of older adults in Aotearoa, New Zealand. Furthermore, we investigated the relationship between participants' anticholinergic and sedative medication burden and their total healthcare costs to explore the viability of deprescribing interventions within this cohort. METHODS: Healthcare cost analysis was conducted using data collected during a randomized controlled trial within a frail, older cohort. The collected information included participant demographics, medications used, frailty, cost of service use of aged residential care and outpatient hospital services, hospital admissions, and dispensed medications. RESULTS: Data from 338 study participants recruited between 25 September 2018 and 30 October 2020 with a mean age of 80 years were analyzed. The total cost of healthcare per participant ranged from New Zealand $15 (US dollar $10) to New Zealand $270 681 (US dollar $175 943) over 6 months postrecruitment into the study. Four individuals accounted for 26% of this cohort's total healthcare cost. We found frailty to be associated with increased healthcare costs, whereas the drug burden was only associated with increased pharmaceutical costs, not overall healthcare costs. CONCLUSIONS: With no relationship found between a patient's anticholinergic and sedative medication burden and their total healthcare costs, more research is required to understand how and where to unlock healthcare cost savings within frail, older populations.

Drug and Natural Health Product Data Collection and Curation in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging.

This study aimed to develop an efficient data collection and curation process for all drugs and natural health products (NHPs) used by participants to the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). The three-step sequential process consisted of (a) mapping drug inputs collected through the CLSA to the Health Canada Drug Product Database (DPD), (b) algorithm recoding of unmapped drug and NHP inputs, and (c) manual recoding of unmapped drug and NHP inputs. Among the 30,097 CLSA comprehensive cohort participants, 26,000 (86.4%) were using a drug or an NHP with a mean of 5.3 (SD 3.8) inputs per participant user for a total of 137,366 inputs. Of those inputs, 70,177 (51.1%) were mapped to the Health Canada DPD, 20,729 (15.1%) were recoded by algorithms, and 44,108 (32.1%) were manually recoded. The Direct algorithm correctly classified 99.4 per cent of drug inputs and 99.5 per cent of NHP inputs. We developed an efficient three-step process for drug and NHP data collection and curation for use in a longitudinal cohort.

Theoretical Underpinnings of a Model to Reduce Polypharmacy and Its Negative Health Effects: Introducing the Team Approach to Polypharmacy Evaluation and Reduction (TAPER).

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy, particularly among older adults, is gaining recognition as an important risk to health. The harmful effects on health arise from disease-drug and drug-drug interactions, the cumulative burden of side effects from multiple medications and the burden to the patient. Single-disease clinical guidelines fail to consider the complex reality of optimising treatments for patients with multiple morbidities and medications. Efforts have been made to develop and implement interventions to reduce the risk of harmful effects, with some promising results. However, the theoretical basis (or pre-clinical work) that informed the development of these efforts, although likely undertaken, is unclear, difficult to find or inadequately described in publications. It is critical in interpreting effects and achieving effectiveness to understand the theoretical basis for such interventions. OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to outline the theoretical underpinnings of the development of a new polypharmacy intervention: the Team Approach to Polypharmacy Evaluation and Reduction (TAPER). METHODS: We examined deprescribing barriers at patient, provider, and system levels and mapped them to the chronic care model to understand the behavioural change requirements for a model to address polypharmacy. RESULTS: Using the chronic care model framework for understanding the barriers, we developed a model for addressing polypharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: We discuss how TAPER maps to address the specific patient-level, provider-level, and system-level barriers to deprescribing and aligns with three commonly used models and frameworks in medicine (the chronic care model, minimally disruptive medicine, the cumulative complexity model). We also describe how TAPER maps onto primary care principles, ultimately providing a description of the development of TAPER and a conceptualisation of the potential mechanisms by which TAPER reduces polypharmacy and its associated harms.

The association between patients' frailty status, multimorbidity, and demographic characteristics and changes in primary care for chronic conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a pre-post study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of SARS-COV-2 (Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) pandemic on primary care management (frequency of monitoring activities, regular prescriptions, and test results) of older adults with common chronic conditions (diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease) and to examine whether any changes were associated with age, sex, neighbourhood income, multimorbidity, and frailty. METHODS: A research database from a sub-set of McMaster University Sentinel and Information Collaboration family practices was used to identify patients ≥65 years of age with a frailty assessment and 1 or more of the conditions. Patient demographics, chronic conditions, and chronic disease management information were retrieved. Changes from 14 months pre to 14 months since the pandemic were described and associations between patient characteristics and changes in monitoring, prescriptions, and test results were analysed using regression models. RESULTS: The mean age of the 658 patients was 75 years. While the frequency of monitoring activities and prescriptions related to chronic conditions decreased overall, there were no clear trends across sub-groups of age, sex, frailty level, neighbourhood income, or number of conditions. The mean values of disease monitoring parameters (e.g. blood pressure) did not considerably change. The only significant regression model demonstrated that when controlling for all other variables, patients with 2 chronic conditions and those with 4 or more conditions were twice as likely to have reduced numbers of eGFR (Estimated glomerular filtration rate) measures compared to those with only 1 condition ((OR (odds ratio) = 2.40, 95% CI [1.19, 4.87]); (OR = 2.19, 95% CI [1.12, 4.25]), respectively). CONCLUSION: In the first 14 months of the pandemic, the frequency of common elements of chronic condition care did not notably change overall or among higher-risk patients.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Primary Health Care for Chronic Conditions in Canada: Protocol for a Retrospective Pre-Post Study Using National Practice-Based Research Network Data.

BACKGROUND: Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, there have been concerns that interruptions to the health care system may have led to changes in primary care, especially for care of chronic conditions such as diabetes and heart failure. Such changes may have longer term implications for population health. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on indicators of primary care access, comprehensiveness, and appropriateness among adult patients, as well as on specific indictors of chronic conditions. Additionally, this study aims to determine whether any identified changes were associated with patient sociodemographic characteristics and multimorbidity. METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-arm, pre-post study using Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) data. CPCSSN is a research network supported by a primary care electronic medical record database, comprising over 1500 physicians and nearly 2 million patients. We are examining changes in care (eg, frequency of contacts, laboratory tests and investigations, referrals, medications prescribed, etc) among adults. We will also examine indicators specific to evidence-based recommendations for care in patients with diabetes and those with heart failure. We will compare rates of outcomes during key periods of the pandemic between March 13, 2020, and December 31, 2022, with equal time periods before the pandemic. Differences will be examined among specific subgroups of adults, including by decade of age, number of comorbidities, and socioeconomic status. Regression models appropriate to outcome distributions will be used to estimate changes, adjusting for potential confounders. This analysis is part of a mixed-methods study with a qualitative component investigating how patients with diabetes with or without concurrent heart failure perceived the impact of the pandemic on access to primary care and health care-related decisions. This study was approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (14782-C). RESULTS: The start date of this study was October 5, 2022, and the prospective end date is January 31, 2024. As of May 2023, the study cohort (n=875,934) is defined, data cleaning is complete, and exploratory analyses have begun. Extended analyses using 2022 data are planned once the new data becomes available. We will disseminate results through peer-reviewed publications and academic conference, as well as creating evidence briefs, infographics, and a video for policy maker and patient audiences. CONCLUSIONS: This study will investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in changes in the provision of primary care in Canada and whether these potential changes have led to gaps in care. This study will also identify patient-level characteristics associated with changes in care patterns across the COVID-19 pandemic. Indicators specific to chronic conditions, namely diabetes and heart failure, will also be explored to determine whether there were changes in care of these conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05813652; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05813652. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/49131.

Tolerability of bedtime diuretics: a prospective cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to validate, or refute, the common belief that bedtime diuretics are poorly tolerated due to nocturia. DESIGN: Prespecified prospective cohort analysis embedded within the randomised BedMed trial, in which hypertensive participants are randomised to morning versus bedtime antihypertensive administration. SETTING: 352 community family practices across 4 Canadian provinces between March 2017 and September 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 552 hypertensive patients (65.6 years old, 57.4% female) already established on a single once-daily morning antihypertensive and randomised to switch that antihypertensive to bedtime. Of these, 203 used diuretics (27.1% thiazide alone, 70.0% thiazide/non-diuretic combinations) and 349 used non-diuretics. INTERVENTION: Switching the established antihypertensive from morning to bedtime, and comparing the experience of diuretic and non-diuretic users. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome: Adherence to bedtime allocation time at 6 months (defined as the willingness to continue with bedtime use, not an assessment of missed doses). Secondary 6-month outcomes: (1) nocturia considered to be a major burden and (2) increase in overnight urinations/week. All outcomes were self-reported and additionally collected at 6 weeks. RESULTS: At 6 months: Adherence to bedtime allocation time was lower in diuretic users than non-diuretic users (77.3% vs 89.8%; difference 12.6%; 95% CI 5.8% to 19.8%; p<0.0001; NNH 8.0), and more diuretic users considered nocturia a major burden (15.6% vs 1.3%; difference 14.2%; 95% CI 8.9% to 20.6%; p<0.0001; NNH 7.0). Compared with baseline, diuretic users experienced 1.0 more overnight urinations/week (95% CI 0.0 to 1.75; p=0.01). Results did not differ between sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Switching diuretics to bedtime did promote nocturia, but only 15.6% found nocturia a major burden. At 6 months, 77.3% of diuretic users were adherent to bedtime dosing. Bedtime diuretic use is viable for many hypertensive patients, should it ever become clinically indicated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02990663.

Understanding collaborative implementation between community and academic partners in a complex intervention: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Community-academic partnerships (CAPs) can improve the relevance, sustainability, and uptake of new innovations within the community. However, little is known about what topics CAPs focus on and how their discussions and decisions impact implementation at ground level. The objectives of this study were to better understand the activities and learnings from implementation of a complex health intervention by a CAP at the planner/decision-maker level, and how that compared to experiences implementing the program at local sites. METHODS: The intervention, Health TAPESTRY, was implemented by a nine-partner CAP including academic, charitable organizations, and primary care practices. Meeting minutes were analyzed using qualitative description, latent content analysis, and a member check with key implementors. An open-answer survey about the best and worst elements of the program was completed by clients and health care providers and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: In total, 128 meeting minutes were analyzed, 278 providers and clients completed the survey, and six people participated in the member check. Prominent topics of discussion categories from the meeting minutes were: primary care sites, volunteer coordination, volunteer experience, internal and external connections, and sustainability and scalability. Clients liked that they learned new things and gained awareness of community programs, but did not like the volunteer visit length. Clinicians liked the regular interprofessional team meetings but found the program time-consuming. CONCLUSIONS: An important learning was about who had "voice" at the planner/decision-maker level: many of the topics discussed in meeting minutes were not identified as issues or lasting impacts by clients or providers; this may be due to differing roles and needs, but may also identify a gap. Overall, we identified three phases that could serve as a guide for other CAPs: Phase (1) recruitment, financial support, and data ownership; Phase (2) considerations for modifications and adaptations; Phase (3) active input and reflection.

A Proposed Curricular Framework for an Interprofessional Approach to Deprescribing.

Deprescribing involves reducing or stopping medications that are causing more harm than good or are no longer needed. It is an important approach to managing polypharmacy, yet healthcare professionals identify many barriers. We present a proposed pre-licensure competency framework that describes essential knowledge, teaching strategies, and assessment protocols to promote interprofessional deprescribing skills. The framework considers how to involve patients and care partners in deprescribing decisions. An action plan and example curriculum mapping exercise are included to help educators assess their curricula, and select and implement these concepts and strategies within their programs to ensure learners graduate with competencies to manage increasingly complex medication regimens as people age. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01704-9.

Post Hoc Analyses of a Randomized Controlled Trial for the Effect of Pharmacist Deprescribing Intervention on the Anticholinergic Burden in Frail Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

OBJECTIVES: Anticholinergic burden is detrimental to cognitive health. Multiple studies found that a high anticholinergic burden is associated with an increased risk for dementia, changes to the brain structure, function, and cognitive decline. We performed a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled deprescribing trial. We compared the effect of the intervention on baseline anticholinergic burden across the treatment and control groups and the time of recruitment before and after a lockdown due to the COVID pandemic with subgroup analyses by baseline frailty index. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed data from a de-prescribing trial of older adults (>65 years) previously conducted in New Zealand that was focused on reducing the Drug Burden Index (DBI). METHODS: We used the anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) to quantify the impact of the intervention on reducing the anticholinergic burden. Participants not taking anticholinergics at the start of the trial were excluded. The primary outcome for this subgroup analysis was a change in ACB, measured with the gHedges statistic describing the difference in standard deviation units of this change between intervention and control. For this analysis, the trial participants were stratified into low, medium, and high frailty and timing into prior- and post-lockdown (public health measures for COVID-19). RESULTS: Among the 295 participants in this analysis, the median (IQR) age was 79 (74, 85), and 67% were women. For the primary outcome gHedges = -0.04 (95% CI -0.26 to 0.19) with a -0.23 mean reduction in ACB in the intervention arm and -0.19 in the control arm. Before lockdown gHedges = -0.38 (95% CI -0.84 to 0.04) and post-lockdown gHedges = 0.07 (95% CI -0.19 to 0.33). The mean change in ACB for each of the frailty strata was as follows: low frailty (-0.02; 95% CI -0.65 to 0.18); medium frailty (0.05; 95% CI -0.28 to 0.38); high frailty (0.08; 95% CI -0.40 to 0.56). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The study did not provide evidence for the effect of pharmacist deprescribing intervention on reducing the anticholinergic burden. However, this post hoc analysis examined the impact of COVID on the effectiveness of the intervention, and further research in this area may be warranted.

Deprescribing to optimise health outcomes for frail older people: a double-blind placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial-outcomes of the Opti-med study.

BACKGROUND: potentially harmful polypharmacy is very common in older people living in aged care facilities. To date, there have been no double-blind randomised controlled studies of deprescribing multiple medications. METHODS: three-arm (open intervention, blinded intervention and blinded control) randomised controlled trial enrolling people aged over 65 years (n = 303, noting pre-specified recruitment target of n = 954) living in residential aged care facilities. The blinded groups had medications targeted for deprescribing encapsulated while the medicines were deprescribed (blind intervention) or continued (blind control). A third open intervention arm had unblinded deprescribing of targeted medications. RESULTS: participants were 76% female with mean age 85.0 ± 7.5 years. Deprescribing was associated with a significant reduction in the total number of medicines used per participant over 12 months in both intervention groups (blind intervention group -2.7 medicines, 95% CI -3.5, -1.9, and open intervention group -2.3 medicines; 95% CI -3.1, -1.4) compared with the control group (-0.3, 95% CI -1.0, 0.4, P = 0.053). Deprescribing regular medicines was not associated with any significant increase in the number of 'when required' medicines administered. There were no significant differences in mortality in the blind intervention group (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.50, 1.73, P = 0.83) or the open intervention group (HR 1.47, 95% CI 0.83, 2.61, P = 0.19) compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: deprescribing of two to three medicines per person was achieved with protocol-based deprescribing during this study. Pre-specified recruitment targets were not met, so the impact of deprescribing on survival and other clinical outcomes remains uncertain.

Team approach to polypharmacy evaluation and reduction: feasibility randomized trial of a structured clinical pathway to reduce polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is associated with poorer health outcomes in older adults. Other than the associated multimorbidity, factors contributing to this association could include medication adverse effects and interactions, difficulties in managing complicated medication regimes, and reduced medication adherence. It is unknown how reversible these negative associations may be if polypharmacy is reduced. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of implementing an operationalized clinical pathway aimed to reduce polypharmacy in primary care and to pilot measurement tools suitable for assessing change in health outcomes in a larger randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: We randomized consenting patients ≥ 70 years old on ≥ 5 long-term medications into intervention or control groups. We collected baseline demographic information and research outcome measures at baseline and 6 months. We assessed four categories of feasibility outcomes: process, resource, management, and scientific. The intervention group received TAPER (team approach to polypharmacy evaluation and reduction), a clinical pathway for reducing polypharmacy using "pause and monitor" drug holiday approach. TAPER integrates patients' goals, priorities, and preferences with an evidence-based "machine screen" to identify potentially problematic medications and support a tapering and monitoring process, all supported by a web-based system, TaperMD. Patients met with a clinical pharmacist and then with their family physician to finalize a plan for optimization of medications using TaperMD. The control group received usual care and were offered TAPER after follow-up at 6 months. RESULTS: All 9 criteria for feasibility were met across the 4 feasibility outcome domains. Of 85 patients screened for eligibility, 39 eligible patients were recruited and randomized; two were excluded post hoc for not meeting the age requirement. Withdrawals (2) and losses to follow-up (3) were small and evenly distributed between arms. Areas for intervention and research process improvement were identified. In general, outcome measures performed well and appeared suitable for assessing change in a larger RCT. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this feasibility study indicate that TAPER as a clinical pathway is feasible to implement in a primary care team setting and in an RCT research framework. Outcome trends suggest effectiveness. A large-scale RCT will be conducted to investigate the effectiveness of TAPER on reducing polypharmacy and improving health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02562352 , Registered September 29, 2015.

Linking Patients' Goals and Priorities to Recommendations for Medication Changes in a Polypharmacy-Focused Structured Clinical Pathway.

Polypharmacy is associated with poorer health outcomes in older adults. It is challenging to minimize the harmful effects of medications while maximizing benefits of single-disease-focused recommendations. Integrating patient input can balance these factors. The objectives are to describe the goals, priorities, and preferences of participants asked about these in a structured process to polypharmacy, and to describe the extent that decision-making within the process mapped onto these, signaling a patient-centered approach. This is a single-group quasi-experimental study, nested within a feasibility randomized controlled trial. Patient goals and priorities were mapped to medication recommendations made during the intervention. Overall, there were 33 participants who reported 55 functional goals and 66 symptom priorities, and 16 participants reported unwanted medications. Overall, 154 recommendations for medication alterations occurred. Of those, 68 (44%) recommendations mapped to the individual's goals and priorities, whereas the rest were based on clinical judgment where no priorities were expressed. Our results signal this process supports a patient-centered approach: allowing conversations around goals and priorities in a structured process to polypharmacy should be integrated into subsequent medication decisions.

Health TAPESTRY Ontario: A Multi-Site Randomized Controlled Trial Testing Implementation and Reproducibility.

PURPOSE: Health Teams Advancing Patient Experience: Strengthening Quality (Health TAPESTRY) is a complex primary care program aimed at assisting older adults to stay healthier for longer. This study evaluated the feasibility of implementation across multiple sites, and the reproducibility of the effects found in the previous randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This was a pragmatic, unblinded, 6-month parallel group randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized (intervention or control) using a computer-generated system. Eligible patients, aged 70 years and older, were rostered to 1 of 6 participating interprofessional primary care practices (urban and rural). In total, 599 (301 intervention, 298 control) patients were recruited from March 2018 through August 2019. Intervention participants received a home visit from volunteers to collect information on physical and mental health, and social context. An interprofessional care team created and implemented a plan of care. The primary outcomes were physical activity and number of hospitalizations. RESULTS: Based on the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, Health TAPESTRY had widespread reach and adoption. In the intention-to-treat analysis (257 intervention, 255 control), there were no statistically significant between-group differences for hospitalizations (incidence rate ratio = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.48-1.30; P = .35) or total physical activity (mean difference = -0.26; 95% CI, -1.18 to 0.67; P = .58). There were 37 non-study related serious adverse events (19 intervention, 18 control). CONCLUSIONS: We found Health TAPESTRY was successfully implemented for patients in diverse primary care practices; however, implementation did not reproduce the effect on hospitalizations and physical activity found in the initial randomized controlled trial.

Association between frailty, chronic conditions and socioeconomic status in community-dwelling older adults attending primary care: a cross-sectional study using practice-based research network data.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome of loss of reserves in energy, physical ability, cognition and general health. Primary care is key in preventing and managing frailty, mindful of the social dimensions that contribute to its risk, prognosis and appropriate patient support. We studied associations between frailty levels and both chronic conditions and socioeconomic status (SES). DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort study SETTING: A practice-based research network (PBRN) in Ontario, Canada, providing primary care to 38 000 patients. The PBRN hosts a regularly updated database containing deidentified, longitudinal, primary care practice data. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 65 years or older, with a recent encounter, rostered to family physicians at the PBRN. INTERVENTION: Physicians assigned a frailty score to patients using the 9-point Clinical Frailty Scale. We linked frailty scores to chronic conditions and neighbourhood-level SES to examine associations between these three domains. RESULTS: Among 2043 patients assessed, the prevalence of low (scoring 1-3), medium (scoring 4-6) and high (scoring 7-9) frailty was 55.8%, 40.3%, and 3.8%, respectively. The prevalence of five or more chronic diseases was 11% among low-frailty, 26% among medium-frailty and 44% among high-frailty groups (χ2=137.92, df 2, p<0.001). More disabling conditions appeared in the top 50% of conditions in the highest-frailty group compared with the low and medium groups. Increasing frailty was significantly associated with lower neighbourhood income (χ2=61.42, df 8, p<0.001) and higher neighbourhood material deprivation (χ2=55.24, df 8, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the triple disadvantage of frailty, disease burden and socioeconomic disadvantage. Frailty care needs a health equity approach: we demonstrate the utility and feasibility of collecting patient-level data within primary care. Such data can relate social risk factors, frailty and chronic disease towards flagging patients with the greatest need and creating targeted interventions.

Deprescribing Anticholinergic and Sedative Drugs to Reduce Polypharmacy in Frail Older Adults Living in the Community: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is associated with poor outcomes in older adults. Targeted deprescribing of anticholinergic and sedative medications may improve health outcomes for frail older adults. Our pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention was a pragmatic 2-arm randomized controlled trial stratified by frailty. We compared usual care (control) with the intervention of pharmacists providing deprescribing recommendations to general practitioners. METHODS: Community-based older adults (≥65 years) from 2 New Zealand district health boards were recruited following a standardized interRAI needs assessment. The Drug Burden Index (DBI) was used to quantify the use of sedative and anticholinergic medications for each participant. The trial was stratified into low, medium, and high-frailty. We hypothesized that the intervention would increase the proportion of participants with a reduction in DBI ≥ 0.5 within 6 months. RESULTS: Of 363 participants, 21 (12.7%) in the control group and 21 (12.2%) in the intervention group had a reduction in DBI ≥ 0.5. The difference in the proportion of -0.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -7.9% to 7.0%) provided no evidence of efficacy for the intervention. Similarly, there was no evidence to suggest the effectiveness of this intervention for participants of any frailty level. CONCLUSION: Our pharmacist-led medication review of frail older participants did not reduce the anticholinergic/sedative load within 6 months. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown measures required modification of the intervention. Subgroup analyses pre- and post-lockdown showed no impact on outcomes. Reviewing this and other deprescribing trials through the lens of implementation science may aid an understanding of the contextual determinants preventing or enabling successful deprescribing implementation strategies.