Development and validation of a theory-based questionnaire examining barriers and facilitators to discontinuing long-term benzodiazepine receptor agonist use.

BACKGROUND: Long-term use of benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRAs) is a persistent healthcare challenge and poses patient safety risks. Interventions underpinned by behaviour change theory are needed to support discontinuation of long-term BZRA use. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to examine mediators of behaviour change relating to the discontinuation of long-term BZRA use. METHODS: An initial 52 item questionnaire was developed using the 14 domains of TDF version 2 and iteratively refined over two rounds. The questionnaire was disseminated online via online support groups that focused on BZRAs to community-based adults with either current or previous experience of taking BZRAs on a long-term basis (≥3 months). Confirmatory factor analysis was undertaken to assess the questionnaire's reliability, discriminant validity and goodness of fit. The Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) and Comparative Fit Index (CFI) were calculated. RESULTS: Following an iterative process of adjustment, the results obtained from confirmatory factor analysis resulted in the final questionnaire consisting of 29 items across nine theoretical domains. The internal consistency reliability values across these domains ranged from 0.62 to 0.85. For the final model, the SRMR was 0.23, the RMSEA was 0.11 and the CFI was 0.6. CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaire offers a potential tool that could be used to identify domains that need to be targeted as part of a behaviour change intervention at an individual patient level. Further research is needed to assess the questionnaire's acceptability and usability, and to develop a scoring system so that domains can be prioritised and subsequently targeted as part of an intervention.

Management of iron deficiency in women of childbearing age with oral iron intolerance: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial of three doses of an iron-whey-protein formulation : Prospective RandomisEd study of women of Childbearing age with gastroInteStinal Intolerance to Oral iroN (PRECISION).

BACKGROUND: Nutritional deficit and oral iron gastrointestinal intolerance may be a common cause of iron deficiency, which can be managed by pharmacists. AIM: To understand the prevalence of iron deficiency in women of childbearing age with a self-reported history of intolerance to oral iron and the tolerability of three doses of an iron-whey-protein formulation in the care of these women. METHOD: Ferritin and haemoglobin levels were documented in women of childbearing age with oral iron gastrointestinal intolerance. In those with iron deficiency (ferritin < 30 µg/L), adherence, gastrointestinal tolerability, ferritin, transferrin saturation and haemoglobin levels were compared between their prior oral iron product and iron-whey-protein microspheres randomised to three doses (14 mg daily, 25 mg daily and 50 mg daily) for 12 weeks. RESULTS: Most screened women had low iron stores (128 (62.7%); ferritin < 30 µg/L), 65 (31.9%) had moderate to severe iron deficiency (ferritin < 12 µg/L) and 33 (16.2%) had iron deficiency anaemia (ferritin < 30 µg/L, haemoglobin < 12 g/dL). Amongst the 59 women who participated in the prospective clinical study of iron-whey-protein microspheres over 12 weeks, 48 (81.4%) were classified as adherent/persistent and fewer instances of gastrointestinal intolerance were reported (0.59 ± 0.91) when compared to 12 (20.3%) and (4.0 ± 2.2) respectively while taking the prior oral iron (Fisher's Exact and T-test respectively, both p < 0.001). There was no difference in adherence or tolerability of different iron-whey-protein formulation doses. Ferritin, haemoglobin and energy levels increased significantly over 12 weeks. CONCLUSION: Undiagnosed iron deficiency is common in women of childbearing age with a history of intolerance to oral iron and iron-whey-protein microspheres can improve adherence, GI tolerability, iron stores, haemoglobin and energy levels in these women. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier (registration includes full trial protocol): NCT04778072.

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, so that many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients. This is the third update of this Cochrane Review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions, alone or in combination, in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers up until 13 January 2021, together with handsearching of reference lists to identify additional studies. We ran updated searches in February 2023 and have added potentially eligible studies to 'Characteristics of studies awaiting classification'. SELECTION CRITERIA: For this update, we included randomised trials only. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy (four or more medicines) in people aged 65 years and older, which used a validated tool to assess prescribing appropriateness. These tools can be classified as either implicit tools (judgement-based/based on expert professional judgement) or explicit tools (criterion-based, comprising lists of drugs to be avoided in older people). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, and two authors extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We pooled study-specific estimates, and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 38 studies, which includes an additional 10 in this update. The included studies consisted of 24 randomised trials and 14 cluster-randomised trials. Thirty-six studies examined complex, multi-faceted interventions of pharmaceutical care (i.e. the responsible provision of medicines to improve patients' outcomes), in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals such as general physicians, pharmacists, nurses and geriatricians, and most were conducted in high-income countries. Assessments using the Cochrane risk of bias tool found that there was a high and/or unclear risk of bias across a number of domains. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall certainty of evidence for each pooled outcome ranged from low to very low. It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care improves medication appropriateness (as measured by an implicit tool) (mean difference (MD) -5.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.26 to -2.06; I2 = 97%; 8 studies, 947 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.05; I2 = 67%; 9 studies, 2404 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PIM (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98; I2 = 84%; 13 studies, 4534 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may slightly reduce the number of potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) (SMD -0.48, 95% CI -1.05 to 0.09; I2 = 92%; 3 studies, 691 participants; low-certainty evidence), however it must be noted that this effect estimate is based on only three studies, which had serious limitations in terms of risk of bias. Likewise, it is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PPO (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.91; I2 = 95%; 7 studies, 2765 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference to hospital admissions (data not pooled; 14 studies, 4797 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference to quality of life (data not pooled; 16 studies, 7458 participants; low-certainty evidence). Medication-related problems were reported in 10 studies (6740 participants) using different terms (e.g. adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions). No consistent intervention effect on medication-related problems was noted across studies. This also applied to studies examining adherence to medication (nine studies, 3848 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy resulted in clinically significant improvement. Since the last update of this review in 2018, there appears to have been an increase in the number of studies seeking to address potential prescribing omissions and more interventions being delivered by multidisciplinary teams.

Investigating physicians' views on non-formulary prescribing: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.

BACKGROUND: Well-designed and well-maintained drug formularies serve as a reliable resource to guide prescribing decisions; they are associated with improved medicine safety and increased efficiency, while also serving as a cost-effective tool to help manage and predict medicine expenditure. Multiple studies have investigated the inappropriate prescribing of non-formulary drugs (NFDs) with statistics indicating that up to 70% of NFD usage being inappropriate or not following the ascribed NFD policies. AIM: To explore physicians' views and influences on their prescribing of non-formulary drugs. METHOD: Data collection and analysis were underpinned using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Thirteen semi-structured interviews were conducted within Hamad Medical Corporation, the main provider of secondary and tertiary healthcare in Qatar, with physicians who had submitted a NFD request in the preceding 12 months. RESULTS: Three overarching themes were identified: providing evidence-based care for individual patients; influences of others; and formulary management issues. Subthemes were mapped to specific TDF domains: environmental context and resources; social influences; professional role and identity; beliefs about consequences; goals; intentions. CONCLUSION: The behavioral influences identified in this study can be mapped to behavior change strategies facilitating the development of an intervention to promote appropriate prescribing of NFDs with implications for medicine safety and healthcare efficiency.

Cardiometabolic risk in people under 40 years with severe mental illness: reading between the guidelines.

People with severe mental illness (SMI) have a shorter life expectancy than the rest of the population. Multimorbidity and poorer physical health contribute to this health inequality. Cardiometabolic multimorbidity confers a significant mortality risk in this population. Multimorbidity is not restricted to older people and people with SMI present with multimorbidity earlier in life. Despite this, most screening, prevention and treatment strategies target older people. People under 40 years with SMI are underserved by current guidelines for cardiovascular risk assessment and reduction. Research is needed to develop and implement interventions to reduce cardiometabolic risk in this population.

Evidence for using point-of-care diagnostics in the management of respiratory tract infections in primary care: a scoping review protocol.

Background:  Antimicrobial resistance (AmR) is widely considered a global health threat and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and costs. Inappropriate antimicrobial use is the most important modifiable risk factor for AmR. Most human antimicrobial medicines use occurs in primary care [prescribed by general practitioners (GPs), dispensed by community pharmacists (CPs)]. However, up to 50% of use is deemed inappropriate. Point-of-care diagnostic tests are used as a basis for antimicrobial stewardship interventions to improve the diagnostic certainty of respiratory tract infections (RTIs), and therefore ensure prudent antimicrobial use. However, there is a lack of guidance on their use, and they are therefore not routinely used in clinical practice. Objective: A scoping review will be conducted to synthesise the available evidence to inform the development of best practice guidance for using point-of-care diagnostics in the management of RTIs in primary care. Methods: A scoping review will be conducted following guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and reported using the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Databases including Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, the International HTA database and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, as well as grey literature, will be searched. Screening will be undertaken independently by two reviewers to identify studies and literature reporting the use of point-of-care diagnostics in the management of RTIs in primary care by GPs and/ or CPs. Findings will be described using narrative synthesis. Conclusion:  The findings of this scoping review will be used to produce draft guidance on the use of point-of-care diagnostic tests in primary care, which will undergo further development using a Delphi consensus methodology involving experts in the field of RTIs, antimicrobial stewardship, point-of-care diagnostics and primary care.

Interprofessional Interventions Involving Pharmacists and Targeting the Medicines Management Process Provided to Older People Residing in Nursing Homes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents are often prescribed multiple medications, which increases their susceptibility to drug-related problems. The medicines management process involves multiple stages, for example, assessing, prescribing, dispensing, delivering and storing, administering, reviewing and monitoring. The medicine management process aims to optimise medicine use and associated patient outcomes. Interprofessional interventions of healthcare professionals from different disciplines in many clinical settings, including the nursing home setting, have shown success in improving patients' clinical outcomes. However, reporting of the pharmacist's role and the impact of these interventions has been unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to systematically identify and describe interprofessional interventions involving pharmacists that target the medicine management process in nursing homes by (a) describing interprofessional interventions and the role of pharmacists within, (b) describing the impact of these interventions, (c) exploring which of the medicine management process stages were targeted and (d) identifying any reported theoretical underpinning. METHODS: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, PsycInfo, Cochrane library, Web of Science and clinical trial registers were searched from the inception date until August 2021. Randomised controlled trials reporting interprofessional interventions involving pharmacists, targeting at least one stage of the medicine management process and provided to nursing home residents with a mean age ≥ 65 years, were included. The search had no restriction on outcomes measured. Included randomised controlled trials were assessed for quality and risk of bias using the Jadad scale and Cochrane Collaboration tool, respectively. The overall certainty of outcomes was assessed using GRADEpro. If present, details about theoretical underpinning were extracted using the theory coding scheme. Fixed and random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled effect estimates to compare outcomes between intervention and control groups, where feasible, or a narrative description was reported. RESULTS: Eighteen manuscripts describing interprofessional interventions involving pharmacists were identified: medication review (n = 14), education (n = 3) and medication simplification (n = 1) based interventions. The pharmacists' most frequent role was the provision of medicine-related recommendations, and they worked mostly with general practitioners and nurses. Residents/family members contributed in 44% of included interventions. A meta-analysis identified that interventions were significantly associated with significant improvements in prescribing appropriateness (standard mean difference - 0.20; 95% confidence interval - 0.33 to - 0.77; I2 = 27%) but not with hospitalisation and mortality. None of the included studies reported a theoretical underpinning to intervention development. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides a detailed description of the impact of interprofessional practice, involving pharmacists, which targets at least one stage of the medicine management process in the nursing home setting. The findings suggest that future research should prioritise improving prescribing inappropriateness rather than the number of long-term medications prescribed. It remains unknown if interventions are designed using theory and, therefore, it is not clear whether theory-derived interventions are more effective than those without a theoretical element. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol was published in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) [Ref: CRD42020181744].

Public perceptions of pharmacogenomic services in Ireland - Are people with chronic disease more likely to want service availability than those without? A questionnaire study.

Background: As pharmacogenomic services begin to emerge in primary care, the insight of the public is crucial for its integration into clinical practice. Objectives: To establish perceptions of pharmacogenomics (awareness, understanding, openness to availability, perceived benefits and concerns, willingness to pay, and service setting) and investigate if they differ between those with and without chronic disease(s). Methods: An anonymous, online questionnaire generated using Qualtrics® and circulated via social media and posters placed in eight participating community pharmacies was conducted with Irish adults. The questions were designed to consider existing literature on patient perceptions of pharmacogenomics. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize questionnaire responses. Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables, while independent sample t-test and one-way ANOVA were used to compare the mean values of two (with and without chronic disease) and three groups (multimorbidity (two or more chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (prescribed four or more regular medicines) (MMPP), a single chronic disease, and those without existing medical conditions) respectively Logistic regression was used to evaluate age and gender adjusted associations of chronic disease(s) with responses. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 421 responses were received, 30% (n = 120) of whom reported having a chronic disease. Overall, respondents reported low awareness (44%, n = 166) and poor knowledge (55%, n = 212) of pharmacogenomics. After explaining pharmacogenomics to respondents, patients with chronic disease(s) were 2.17 times more likely (p < 0.001) to want pharmacogenomic services availability than those without existing conditions, adjusted for age and gender (driven by preferences of those with MMPP than those with single chronic disease). Respondents demonstrated a high level of interest and noted both the potential benefits and downsides of pharmacogenomic testing. Willingness-to-pay was not associated with having a chronic disease and respondents were more positive about primary care (community pharmacy or general practice) rather than hospital-based pharmacogenomics implementation. Conclusion: The Irish public in general and those with chronic disease in particular are strongly supportive of pharmacogenomic testing, highlighting an unmet need for its incorporation in medicines optimization. These data underline the need for more research on the implementation of community-based pharmacogenomics services for MMPP patients and ubiquitous pharmacogenomics education programs.

An external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care (PolyPrime).

BACKGROUND: For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy (use of multiple medications) is a standard practice. PolyPrime is a theory-based intervention developed to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. This pilot study aims to assess the feasibility of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care in Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). METHODS: This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aimed to recruit 12 general practitioner (GP) practices (six in NI; six in the ROI counties that border NI) and ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) per GP practice (n = 120). Practices allocated to the intervention arm watched an online video and scheduled medication reviews with patients on two occasions. We assessed the feasibility of collecting GP record (medication appropriateness, health service use) and patient self-reported data [health-related quality of life (HRQoL), health service use)] at baseline, 6 and 9 months. HRQoL was measured using the EuroQol-5 dimension-5 level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and medication-related burden quality-of-life (MRB-QoL) tool. An embedded process evaluation and health economics analysis were also undertaken. Pre-specified progression criteria were used to determine whether to proceed to a definitive cRCT. RESULTS: Twelve GP practices were recruited and randomised. Three GP practices withdrew from the study due to COVID-related factors. Sixty-eight patients were recruited, with 47 (69.1%) being retained until the end of the study. GP record data were available for 47 patients for medication appropriateness analysis at 9 months. EQ-5D-5L and MRB-QoL data were available for 46 and 41 patients, respectively, at 9 months. GP record and patient self-reported health service use data were available for 47 patients at 9 months. Health service use was comparable in terms of overall cost estimated from GP record versus patient self-reported data. The intervention was successfully delivered as intended; it was acceptable to GPs, practice staff, and patients; and potential mechanisms of action have been identified. All five progression criteria were met (two 'Go', three 'Amend'). CONCLUSION: Despite challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study has demonstrated that it may be feasible to conduct an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care across two healthcare jurisdictions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897 . Registered 19 November 2019. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

The development and validation of a medicines optimisation tool to protect the physical health of people with severe mental illness (OPTIMISE).

BACKGROUND: The life expectancy of people with severe mental illness (SMI) is shorter than those without SMI, with multimorbidity and poorer physical health contributing to health inequality. Screening tools could potentially assist the optimisation of medicines to protect the physical health of people with SMI. The aim of our research was to design and validate a medicines optimisation tool (OPTIMISE) to help clinicians to optimise physical health in people with SMI. METHODS: A review of existing published guidelines, PubMed and Medline was carried out. Literature was examined for medicines optimisation recommendations and also for reference to the management of physical illness in people with mental illness. Potential indicators were grouped according to physiological system. A multidisciplinary team with expertise in mental health and the development of screening tools agreed that 83 indicators should be included in the first draft of OPTIMISE. The Delphi consensus technique was used to develop and validate the contents. A 17-member multidisciplinary panel of experts from the UK and Ireland completed 2 rounds of Delphi consensus, rating their level of agreement to 83 prescribing indicators using a 5-point Likert scale. Indicators were accepted for inclusion in the OPTIMISE tool after achieving a median score of 1 or 2, where 1 indicated strongly agree and 2 indicated agree, and 75th centile value of ≤ 2. Interrater reliability was assessed among 4 clinicians across 20 datasets and the chance corrected level of agreement (kappa) was calculated. The kappa statistic was interpreted as poor if 0.2 or less, fair if 0.21-0.4, moderate if 0.41-0.6, substantial if 0.61-0.8, and good if 0.81-1.0. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved after 2 rounds of Delphi for 62 prescribing indicators where 53 indicators were accepted after round 1 and a further 9 indicators were accepted after round 2. Interrater reliability of OPTIMISE between physicians and pharmacists indicated a substantial level of agreement with a kappa statistic of 0.75. CONCLUSIONS: OPTIMISE is a 62 indicator medicines optimisation tool designed to assist decision making in those treating adults with SMI. It was developed using a Delphi consensus methodology and interrater reliability is substantial. OPTIMISE has the potential to improve medicines optimisation by ensuring preventative medicines are considered when clinically indicated. Further research involving the implementation of OPTIMISE is required to demonstrate its true benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This article does not report the results of a health care intervention on human participants.

Theoretically derived interventions aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in primary care: A systematic review.

Background: Polypharmacy (the use of multiple medications) is common in older patients and achieving a balance between appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy is a challenge routinely faced by prescribers. It is recommended to incorporate the use of theory when developing complex interventions, but it is not known if theoretically derived interventions aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy are effective. Objective: This systematic review aimed to establish the overall effectiveness of theoretically derived interventions on improving appropriate polypharmacy and to investigate the degree to which theory informed intervention design. Methods: Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to August 2021 including hand-searching of reference lists. Interventions developed using a theory, involving the use of a validated tool to assess prescribing, delivered in primary care to participants with a mean age of ≥65 years and prescribed ≥four medications, were included. Data was extracted independently by two reviewers. The Theory Coding Scheme (TCS) was applied to evaluate the use of theory; Risk of Bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. Results: Two studies, one feasibility study and one randomised controlled trial (RCT) were included, and therefore overall effectiveness of the theoretically derived intervention could not be assessed. Theory used in development included the Theoretical Domains Framework and Reason's system-based risk management theory. The RCT was rated to have a high RoB. Based on the TCS, neither study used theory completely. Conclusion: The effectiveness of theoretically derived interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy in primary care could not be determined due to the small number of studies and their heterogeneity. Further incorporation of theory into intervention development is required to understand the effectiveness of this approach.Prospero registration: CRD42020157175.

A scoping review of the methods and processes used by regulatory bodies to determine pharmacists' readiness for practice.

BACKGROUND: There is an expectation from government, regulatory bodies, patients, the public, and other healthcare professions that pharmacists are competent professionals who can practice independently. Regulation of the profession requires pharmacy graduates to register with a recognised regulatory body before being considered 'ready to practise' independently. OBJECTIVE: To examine the methods and processes used by national regulatory bodies to determine pharmacists' readiness to practise. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted using three electronic databases (Embase, Scopus, CINAHL) and websites of national regulatory bodies. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they described the methods and processes used by regulatory bodies to determine pharmacists' readiness to practise. Data were extracted relating to readiness to practise, the registration exam and the role of newly qualified pharmacists, post-registration. Extracted data were collated using narrative descriptive summaries and accompanying tables. RESULTS: Identified data sources referred to registration of pharmacists across 11 different countries. No sources provided a definition for the term 'ready to practise'. Ten countries were identified as holding a registration examination with varying formats and curricula. Written and oral exams, competency based written assessments, Objective Structured Clinical Examinations and a combination of these were identified with written exam being the most popular (n = 8). In all but one country, the regulator was responsible for delivery of the exam. In most cases (n = 7), the exam was mapped to a pre-defined set of competencies with only a few (n = 4) explaining how these competencies were developed. Only two sources made reference to the role of the newly qualified pharmacist post-registration. CONCLUSION: The review has established a paucity of research and publicly available information on the methods and processes used by national regulators to determine pharmacists' readiness to practise. There is no pharmacy definition of being 'ready to practise'. Assessment methods vary widely and, currently, no gold standard is apparent.

Supporting safe and gradual reduction of long-term benzodiazepine receptor agonist use: Development of the SAFEGUARDING-BZRAs toolkit using a codesign approach.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BZRA) use persists in healthcare settings worldwide and poses risks of patient harm. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop an intervention to support discontinuation of long-term BZRA use among willing individuals. METHODS: The intervention development process aligned with the UK Medical Research Council's complex intervention framework. This involved a previous systematic review of brief interventions targeting long-term BZRA use in primary care and qualitative interviews based on the Theoretical Domains Framework that explored barriers and facilitators to discontinuing long-term BZRA use. A codesign approach was used involving an active partnership between experts by experience, researchers and clinicians. Intervention content was specified in terms of behaviour change techniques (BCTs). RESULTS: The SAFEGUARDING-BZRAs (Supporting sAFE and GradUAl ReDuctIon of loNG-term BenZodiazepine Receptor Agonist uSe) toolkit comprises 24 BCTs and includes recommendations targeted at primary care-based clinicians for operationalizing each BCT to support individuals with BZRA discontinuation. CONCLUSION: The SAFEGUARDING-BZRAs toolkit has been developed using a systematic and theory-based approach that addresses identified limitations of previous research. Further research is needed to assess its usability and acceptability by service users and clinicians, as well as its potential to effectively support safe and gradual reduction of long-term BZRA use. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The qualitative interview phase included patients as participants. The codesign process included 'experts by experience' with either current or previous experience of long-term BZRA use as collaborators.

Pharmacogenetic interventions to improve outcomes in patients with multimorbidity or prescribed polypharmacy: a systematic review.

Conventional medicines optimisation interventions in people with multimorbidity and polypharmacy are complex and yet limited; a more holistic and integrated approach to healthcare delivery is required. Pharmacogenetics has potential as a component of medicines optimisation. Studies involving multi-medicine pharmacogenetics in adults with multimorbidity or polypharmacy, reporting on outcomes derived from relevant core outcome sets, were included in this systematic review. Narrative synthesis was undertaken to summarise the data; meta-analysis was inappropriate due to study heterogeneity. Fifteen studies of diverse design and variable quality were included. A small, randomised study involving pharmacist-led medicines optimisation, including pharmacogenetics, suggests this approach could have significant benefits for patients and health systems. However, due to study design heterogeneity and the quality of the included studies, it is difficult to draw generalisable conclusions. Further pragmatic, robust pharmacogenetics studies in diverse, real-world patient populations, are required to establish the benefit of multi-medicine pharmacogenetic screening on patient outcomes.

'I just thought that it was such an impossible thing': A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to discontinuing long-term use of benzodiazepine receptor agonists using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

INTRODUCTION: Existing interventions to reduce long-term benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BZRA) use lack theoretical underpinning and detailed descriptions. This creates difficulties in understanding how interventions work and how to replicate them in practice. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) can be used to identify behaviour change determinants to target during intervention development. OBJECTIVE: To explore barriers and facilitators to discontinuing BZRA use from the perspective of both current and previous long-term BZRA users. DESIGN/SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Semistructured TDF-based interviews were conducted with community-based individuals with current or previous experience of long-term BZRA use. Data were recorded, transcribed and analysed using the framework method. RESULTS: Twenty-eight individuals were interviewed. Despite commonalities in perceived barriers/facilitators to discontinuing BZRA use within individual TDF domains, individual participants had different experiences of identified determinants of BZRA discontinuation. For example, both similarities and differences existed within and between each participant group in terms of knowledge of the appropriate duration of BZRA use ('Knowledge' domain) and experience of withdrawal symptoms ('Reinforcement' domain). Compared to previous users, current users typically anticipated more barriers to discontinuing BZRA use and fewer positive consequences of discontinuation. CONCLUSION: This study reports on barriers and facilitators to discontinuing BZRA use from the perspectives of current and previous long-term users. The findings highlight the challenging nature of BZRA discontinuation and a multitude of barriers that impact participants' behaviour regarding BZRA use. Future work will involve developing a theory-based intervention to support BZRA discontinuation in primary care. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: The study included patients as participants.

NT-proBNP/BNP ratio for prognostication in European Caucasian patients enrolled in a heart failure prevention programme.

AIMS: Guidelines support the role of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and amino-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP) for risk stratification of patients in programmes to prevent heart failure (HF). Although biologically formed in a 1:1 ratio, the ratio of NT-proBNP to BNP exhibits wide inter-individual variability. A report on an Asian population suggests that molar NT-proBNP/BNP ratio is associated with incident HF. This study aims to determine whether routine, simultaneous evaluation of both BNP and NT-proBNP is warranted in a European, Caucasian population. METHODS AND RESULTS: We determined BNP and NT-proBNP levels for 782 Stage A/B HF patients in the STOP-HF programme. The clinical, echocardiographic, and biochemical associates of molar NT-proBNP/BNP ratio were analysed. The primary endpoint was the adjusted association of baseline molar NT-proBNP/BNP ratio with new-onset HF and/or progression of left ventricular dysfunction (LVD). We estimated the C-statistic, integrated discrimination improvement, and the category-free net reclassification improvement metric for the addition of molar NT-proBNP/BNP ratio to adjusted models. The median age was 66.6 years [interquartile range (IQR) 59.5-73.1], 371 (47.4%) were female, and median molar NT-proBNP/BNP ratio was 1.91 (IQR 1.37-2.93). Estimated glomerular filtration rate, systolic blood pressure, left ventricular mass index, and heart rate were associated with NT-proBNP/BNP ratio in a linear regression model (all P < 0.05). Over a median follow-up period of 5 years (IQR 3.4-6.8), 247 (31.5%) patients developed HF or progression of LVD. Log-transformed NT-proBNP/BNP ratio is inversely associated with HF and LVD risk when adjusted for age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, vascular disease, obesity, heart rate, number of years of follow-up, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and baseline NT-proBNP (odds ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.55-0.91; P = 0.008). However, molar NT-proBNP/BNP ratio did not increase the C-statistic (Δ -0.01) and net reclassification improvement (0.0035) for prediction of HF and LVD compared with NT-proBNP or BNP alone. Substitution of NT-proBNP for BNP in the multivariable model eliminated the association with HF and LVD risk. CONCLUSIONS: This study characterized, for the first time in a Caucasian Stage A/B HF population, the relationship between NT-proBNP/BNP ratio and biological factors and demonstrated an inverse relationship with the future development of HF and LVD. However, this study does not support routine simultaneous BNP and NT-proBNP measurement in HF prevention programmes amongst European, Caucasian patients.

Protocol for a process evaluation of an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care: the PolyPrime study.

BACKGROUND: The PolyPrime intervention is a theory-based intervention aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people (aged ≥65 years) in primary care. The intervention consists of an online video which demonstrates how general practitioners (GPs) can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. The aim of the process evaluation is to further examine the implementation of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care. This will involve investigating whether the PolyPrime intervention can be delivered as intended across two healthcare systems, how acceptable the intervention is to GPs, practice staff and patients, and to identify the intervention's likely mechanisms of action. METHODS: The PolyPrime study is an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) which aims to recruit 12 GP practices across Northern Ireland [NI] (n=6) and the six counties in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) that border NI (n=6). Practices have been randomised to intervention or usual care. An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention to GPs, practice staff and patients and potential mechanisms of action (i.e. what components of the intervention were perceived to be effective). Quantitative data will be collected from data collection forms completed by GPs and practice staff and a feedback questionnaire completed by patients from intervention arm practices, which will be analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with GPs and practice staff and audio-recordings of medication review appointments from the intervention arm practices which will be transcribed and analysed using the framework method. Quantitative and qualitative data will be triangulated to provide an overall assessment of intervention fidelity, intervention acceptability, and mechanisms of action. DISCUSSION: This process evaluation will add to feasibility data from the pilot cRCT by providing evidence on the fidelity of implementing the intervention package across two healthcare systems, the acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN41009897 . Registered on 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

An external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care (PolyPrime): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The use of multiple medications (polypharmacy) is a concern in older people (≥65 years) and is associated with negative health outcomes. For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy is the reality and the key challenge is ensuring appropriate polypharmacy (as opposed to inappropriate polypharmacy). This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aims to further test a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care in two jurisdictions, Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). METHODS: Twelve GP practices across NI (n=6) and the six counties in the ROI that border NI will be randomised to either the intervention or usual care group. Members of the research team have developed an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change. The intervention consists of two components: (1) an online video which demonstrates how a GP may prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and (2) a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. Ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥4 medications) will be recruited per GP practice (n=120). GP practices allocated to the intervention arm will be asked to watch the online video and schedule medication reviews with patients on two occasions; an initial and a 6-month follow-up appointment. GP practices allocated to the control arm will continue to provide usual care to patients. The study will assess the feasibility of recruitment, retention and study procedures including collecting data on medication appropriateness (from GP records), quality of life and health service use (i.e. hospitalisations). An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action. DISCUSSION: This pilot cRCT will provide evidence of the feasibility of a range of study parameters such as recruitment and retention, data collection procedures and the acceptability of the intervention. Pre-specified progression criteria will also be used to determine whether or not to proceed to a definitive cRCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897 . Registered 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.