Feasibility of a practical nurse administered risk assessment tool for drug-related problems in home care.

AIM: To evaluate feasibility of a practical nurse-administered Drug-related Problem Risk Assessment Tool among home care clients ⩾65 years. METHODS: Altogether, 36 practical nurses participated in the study. They were trained about the purpose and use of the tool. The training consisted of a day long interactive workshop and involved reviewing four self-selected clients' medications using the tool (one as a pre-assignment before and three as post-assignments after the workshop). The data of this study were collected during the training. Triangulation, i.e. combination of methods and data, was used to evaluate the feasibility of the tool. Quantitative data were gathered from returned post-assignment tools and qualitative data from face-to-face discussions and open questions in feedback forms the practical nurses returned after the training. RESULTS: Practical nurses spent 10-45 minutes reviewing one client's medication using the tool (mean 20±8). They identified reliably 88% of the risk medicines used by the clients listed in the tool. Of the respondents (n=23) of the feedback forms, 43% reported that they felt it easy or quite easy to answer the questions of the tool. Generic names of medicines, time constraints, home-care workers'/client's lack of interest to client's pharmacotherapy and short client contacts were the most common barriers to use the tool. CONCLUSIONS: The Drug-Related Problem Risk Assessment Tool turned out to be feasible among practical nurses. The brief training on the content and use of the tool seems to be sufficient for ensuring reliable use of the tool.

Content validation of a tool for assessing risks for drug-related problems to be used by practical nurses caring for home-dwelling clients aged ≥65 years: a Delphi survey.

PURPOSE: Home care services are becoming a critically important part of health care delivery as populations are aging. Those using home care services are increasingly older, more frail than previously, and use multiple medications, making them vulnerable to drug-related problems (DRPs). Practical nurses (PN) visit home-dwelling aged clients frequently and, thus, are ideally situated to identify potential DRPs and, if needed, to communicate them to physicians for resolution. This study developed and validated the content of a tool to be used by PNs for assessing DRP risks for their home-dwelling clients aged ≥65 years. METHODS: The first draft of the tool was based on two systematic literature reviews and clinical experience of our research group. Content validity of the tool was determined by a three-round Delphi survey with a panel of 18 experts in geriatric care and pharmacotherapy. An agreement by ≥80% of the panel on an item was required. RESULTS: The final tool consists of 18 items that assess risks for DRPs in home-dwelling aged clients. It is divided into four sections: (1) Basic Client Data, (2) Potential Risks for DRPs in Medication Use, (3) Characteristics of the Client's Care and Adherence, and (4) Recommendations for Actions to Resolve DRPs. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi process resulted in a structured DRP Risk Assessment Tool that is focused on the highest priority DRPs that should be identified and resolved. The tool also assists the PNs to identify solutions to these problems, which is a unique feature compared to similarly purposed prior tools.

Comparison of prescribing criteria to evaluate the appropriateness of drug treatment in individuals aged 65 and older: a systematic review.

Because inappropriate prescribing is prevalent in individuals aged 65 and older, various criteria to assess it have been developed. This study's aim was to systematically review articles that describe criteria for assessing inappropriate prescribing in individuals aged 65 and older and to define the circumstances of their use (explicit/implicit), origins, development processes, and content. A systematic search was conducted on MEDLINE and PubMed (1990-2010) and augmented with a manual search. Original articles written in English were included if they described the development of the criteria and were aimed at people aged 65 and older. Articles that described criteria applicable only in hospital settings, specific drugs, or a particular disease or condition were excluded. Sixteen of 535 articles met the inclusion criteria. They described 14 criteria, half originating in the United States. The English-language restriction limited the search results. Most criteria were explicit, consensus validated, based totally or partly on Beers criteria, and focused on pharmacological appropriateness of prescribing and some were old. Drug- and disease-oriented explicit criteria require regular updating and are country specific. Implicit, person-specific criteria are universal and do not need updating, although their use requires up-to-date professional skills. Unlike explicit criteria, implicit criteria have been validated in people. Some of the 14 criteria were noncomprehensive, mainly because of the intended purpose. To conclude, different criteria exist for optimizing prescribing for individuals aged 65 and older. Possible deficiencies must be recognized and trade-offs made when selecting criteria for use. In the future, more-comprehensive and -timely criteria are needed.