Development and Delphi consensus validation of the Medication-Related Fall screening and scoring tool.

BACKGROUND: Falls are a significant public health problem and constitute a major cause of injuries and mortality. Risk factors for falls are multifactorial and include medication use. AIM: To develop and investigate the content validity of the Medication-Related fall (MRF) screening and scoring tool. METHOD: The MRF tool was developed from clinical practice guidelines addressing medication-related problems, and additional medications identified by specialist pharmacists across a region of the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland). Medication classes were categorised according to their 'potential to cause falls' as: high-risk (three points), moderate-risk (two points) or low-risk (one point). The overall medication-related falls risk for the patient was determined by summing the scores for all medications. The MRF was validated using Delphi consensus methodology, whereby three iterative rounds of surveys were conducted using SurveyMonkey®. Twenty-two experts from 10 countries determined their agreement with the falls risk associated with each medication on a 5-point Likert scale. Only medications with at least 75% of respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing were retained in the next round. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 19 medications/medication classes to be included in the final version of the MRF tool; ten were classified as high-risk, eight as moderate-risk and one as low-risk. CONCLUSION: The MRF tool is simple and has the potential to be integrated into medicines optimisation to reduce falls risk and negative fall-related outcomes. The score from the MRF tool can be used as a clinical parameter to assess the need for medication review and clinical interventions.

Prescribing and deprescribing in older people with life-limiting illnesses receiving hospice care at the end of life: A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although prescribing and deprescribing practices in older people have been the subject of much research generally, there are limited data in older people at the end of life. This highlights the need for research to determine prescribing and deprescribing patterns, as a first step to facilitate guideline development for medicines optimisation in this vulnerable population. AIMS: To examine prescribing and deprescribing patterns in older people at the end of life and to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use. DESIGN: A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study where medical records of eligible participants were reviewed, and data extracted. Medication appropriateness was assessed using two sets of consensus-based criteria; the STOPPFrail criteria and criteria developed by Morin et al. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Decedents aged 65 years and older admitted continuously for at least 14 days before death to three inpatient hospice units across Northern Ireland, who died between 1st January and 31st December 2018, and who had a known diagnosis, known cause of death and prescription data. Unexpected/sudden deaths were excluded. RESULTS: Polypharmacy was reported to be continued until death in 96.2% of 106 decedents (mean age of 75.6 years). Most patients received at least one potentially inappropriate medication at the end of life according to the STOPPFrail and the criteria developed by Morin et al. (57.5 and 69.8% respectively). Limited prevalence of proactive deprescribing interventions was observed. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of systematic rationalisation of drug treatments, a substantial proportion of older patients continued to receive potentially inappropriate medication until death.

Using the COM-B framework to elucidate facilitators and barriers to COVID-19 vaccine uptake in pregnant women: a qualitative study.

Since April 2021, COVID-19 vaccines have been recommended for pregnant women. Despite this, COVID-19 vaccine uptake in this group is low compared to the non-pregnant population of childbearing age. Our aim was to understand barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccine uptake among pregnant women in Northern Ireland using the COM-B framework, and so to make recommendations for public health interventions. The COM-B proposes that human behaviour is influenced by the extent to which a person has the capability, opportunity, and motivation to enact that behaviour. Understanding the factors underpinning behaviour through this lens helps discern what needs to change to change behaviour, therefore supporting the development of targeted interventions.This study consisted of eight semi-structured interviews with new/expectant mothers who did not receive a COVID-19 vaccine dose while pregnant since April 2021, and a focus group with five participants who received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose while pregnant. Interview and focus group data were analysed using semi-deductive reflexive thematic analysis framed by a subtle realist approach. The COM-B was used to categorise codes and subthemes were developed within each COM-B construct.Within Psychological Capability, subthemes captured the need for consistent and reliable COVID-19 vaccine information and access to balanced and jargon-free, risk-benefit information that is tailored to the pregnant individual. The behaviour/opinions of family, friends, and local healthcare providers had a powerful influence on COVID-19 vaccine decisions (Social Opportunity). Integrating the COVID-19 vaccine as part of routine antenatal pathways was believed to support access and sense of familiarity (Physical Opportunity). Participants valued health autonomy, however experienced internal conflict driven by concerns about long-term side effects for their baby (Reflective Motivation). Feelings of fear, lack of empathy from healthcare providers, and anticipated guilt commonly underpinned indecision as to whether to get the vaccine (Automatic Motivation).Our study highlighted that the choice to accept a vaccine during pregnancy generates internal conflict and worry. Several participants cited their concern was primarily around the safety for their baby. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) play a significant part when it comes to decision making about COVID-19 vaccines among pregnant women. HCPs and pregnant women should be involved in the development of interventions to improve the delivery and communication of information.

Healthcare professionals' perspectives of deprescribing in older patients at the end of life in hospice care: a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate healthcare professionals' barriers to and enablers of deprescribing in older hospice patients at the end of life and prioritise relevant theoretical domains for behaviour change to be incorporated into future interventions to facilitate deprescribing. METHODS: Twenty doctors, nurses and pharmacists from four hospices in Northern Ireland participated in qualitative semistructured interviews using Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF)-based topic guides. Data were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using thematic analysis. Deprescribing determinants were mapped to the TDF enabling the prioritisation of domains for behaviour change. KEY FINDINGS: Four prioritised TDF domains represented key barriers to deprescribing implementation; lack of formal documentation of deprescribing outcomes (Behavioural regulation), challenges in communication with patients and families (Skills), lack of implementation of deprescribing tools in practice (Environmental context/resources) and patient and caregiver perceptions of medication (Social influences). Access to information was identified as a key enabler (Environmental context/resources). Perceived risks versus benefits of deprescribing were identified as a key barrier or enabler (Beliefs about consequences). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that further guidance on deprescribing in the context of end-of-life is required to address the growing problems of inappropriate prescribing, Guidance should consider factors such as the adoption of deprescribing tools, monitoring and documentation of deprescribing outcomes and how best to discuss prognostic uncertainty.

Adherence to metformin in adults with type 2 diabetes: a combined method approach.

BACKGROUND: Medication adherence, one of the most important aspects in the process of optimal medicines use, is unfortunately still a major challenge in modern healthcare, and further research is required into how adherence can be assessed and optimised. The aim of this study was to use a combined method approach of self-report and dried blood spot (DBS) sampling coupled with population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) modelling, to assess adherence to metformin in adult patients with type 2 diabetes. Further aims were to assess metformin exposure levels in patients, determine factors associated with non-adherence with prescribed metformin, and to explore the relationship between adherence and therapeutic outcomes. METHODS: A combined method approach was used to evaluate metformin adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes who had been prescribed metformin for a minimum period of 6 months. Patients were recruited from consultant-led diabetic outpatient clinics at three hospitals in Northern Ireland, UK. Data collection involved self-reported questionnaires [Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS), Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire and Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale], direct measurement of metformin concentration in DBS samples, and researcher-led patient interviews. The DBS sampling approach was coupled with population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) modelling, which took account of patient characteristics, metformin dosage and type of formulation prescribed (immediate or sustained release). RESULTS: The proportion of patients considered to be adherent to their prescribed metformin, derived from self-reported MARS scores and metformin concentration in DBS samples, was 61.2% (74 out of 121 patients). The majority (n = 103, 85.1%) of recruited patients had metformin exposure levels that fell within the therapeutic range. However, 17 patients (14.1%) had low exposure to metformin and one patient (0.8%) had undetectable metformin level in their blood sample (non-exposure). Metformin self-administration and use of a purchased adherence pill box significantly increased the probability of a patient being classified as adherent based on logistic regression analysis. Both HbA1c and random glucose levels (representing poor glycaemic control) in the present research were, however, not statistically linked to non-adherence to metformin (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of participating patients were not fully adherent with their therapy. DBS sampling together with the use of a published PopPK model was a useful, novel, direct, objective approach to estimate levels of adherence in adult patients with type 2 diabetes (61.2%).

Potential of UK and US newspapers for shaping patients' knowledge and perceptions about antidiabetic medicines: a content analysis.

BACKGROUND: Information about how newspapers portray antidiabetic medicines to readers is lacking. This study investigated the reporting on antidiabetic medicines in the most widely circulated newspapers published in the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US) over a 10-year period. METHODS: The Nexis UK database was used to identify and select relevant articles. Systematic content analysis of the articles which met the inclusion criteria (articles of any format that contained reference to antidiabetic medicines) within the highest circulated newspapers in the UK and US between 2009 and 2018 was conducted. Inter-rater reliability of coding was established using a 10% sample of the identified articles. RESULTS: A total of 560 (369 UK and 191 US) relevant newspaper articles were retrieved. In the UK, the number of relevant articles showed a slightly increasing trend over the study period, while in the US, article numbers declined over the study period. Safety/risk of antidiabetic medicines was the most frequent theme covered by the articles (34.6%). Over one-third of the newspaper articles were written from a clinical perspective (37.7%). Insulin was the most commonly discussed class of antidiabetic medicine (23.1%). Control of blood sugar levels (53.1%) and side effects/toxicity (92.7%) were the most frequently reported benefit and risk of antidiabetic medicines, respectively. The most frequently reported organ systems harmed by antidiabetic medicines were the cardiovascular, endocrine and gastrointestinal systems. The UK newspapers were more likely to report the benefits of antidiabetic medicines (p = 0.005), while the US articles were more likely to report on harms/risks (p = 0.001). The majority of relevant articles (91.8%) were judged as having a balanced judgement, while 8.2% of the articles were rated as exaggerated. CONCLUSIONS: This study has revealed that antidiabetic medicines are indeed reported on by UK and US newspapers. As media portrayal has the potential to negatively or positively influence patients' views of their medication for diabetes, healthcare professionals should check on patients' beliefs and knowledge about their medication and proactively provide objective and balanced information (including promotion of medication adherence).

Interventions to improve medicines optimisation in frail older patients in secondary and acute care settings: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a geriatric syndrome in which physiological systems have decreased reserve and resistance against stressors. Frailty is associated with polypharmacy, inappropriate prescribing and unfavourable clinical outcomes. AIM: To identify and evaluate randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions designed to optimise the medications of frail older patients, aged 65 years and over, in secondary or acute care settings. METHOD: Literature searches were conducted across seven electronic databases and three trial registries from the date of inception to October 2021. All types of interventional studies were included. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and quality assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Three RCTs were eligible for inclusion; two employed deprescribing as the intervention, and one used comprehensive geriatric assessment. All reported significant improvements in prescribing appropriateness. One study investigated the effect of the intervention on clinical outcomes including hospital presentations, falls, fracture, quality of life and mortality, and reported no significant differences in these outcomes, but did report a significant reduction in monthly medication cost. Two of the included studies were assessed as having 'some concerns' of bias, and one was judged to be at 'high risk' of bias. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that medicines optimisation interventions may improve medication appropriateness in frail older inpatients. However, it highlights the paucity of high-quality evidence that examines the impact of medicines optimisation on quality of prescribing and clinical outcomes for frail older inpatients. High-quality studies are needed to address this gap.

Withdrawal or continuation of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine or both, in people with dementia.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is a progressive syndrome characterised by deterioration in memory, thinking and behaviour, and by impaired ability to perform daily activities. Two classes of drug - cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine) and memantine - are widely licensed for dementia due to Alzheimer's disease, and rivastigmine is also licensed for Parkinson's disease dementia. These drugs are prescribed to alleviate symptoms and delay disease progression in these and sometimes in other forms of dementia. There are uncertainties about the benefits and adverse effects of these drugs in the long term and in severe dementia, about effects of withdrawal, and about the most appropriate time to discontinue treatment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of withdrawal or continuation of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine, or both, in people with dementia on: cognitive, neuropsychiatric and functional outcomes, rates of institutionalisation, adverse events, dropout from trials, mortality, quality of life and carer-related outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register up to 17 October 2020 using terms appropriate for the retrieval of studies of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine. The Specialised Register contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of a number of major healthcare databases, numerous trial registries and grey literature sources. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) which compared withdrawal of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine, or both, with continuation of the same drug or drugs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed citations and full-text articles for inclusion, extracted data from included trials and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Where trials were sufficiently similar, we pooled data for outcomes in the short term (up to 2 months after randomisation), medium term (3-11 months) and long term (12 months or more). We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials investigating cholinesterase inhibitor withdrawal, and one trial investigating withdrawal of either donepezil or memantine. No trials assessed withdrawal of memantine only. Drugs were withdrawn abruptly in five trials and stepwise in two trials. All participants had dementia due to Alzheimer's disease, with severities ranging from mild to very severe, and were taking cholinesterase inhibitors without known adverse effects at baseline. The included trials randomised 759 participants to treatment groups relevant to this review. Study duration ranged from 6 weeks to 12 months. There were too few included studies to allow planned subgroup analyses. We considered some studies to be at unclear or high risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition or reporting bias. Compared to continuing cholinesterase inhibitors, discontinuing treatment may be associated with worse cognitive function in the short term (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.64 to -0.21; 4 studies; low certainty), but the effect in the medium term is very uncertain (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.87 to 0.07; 3 studies; very low certainty). In a sensitivity analysis omitting data from a study which only included participants who had shown a relatively poor prior response to donepezil, inconsistency was reduced and we found that cognitive function may be worse in the discontinuation group in the medium term (SMD -0.62; 95% CI -0.94 to -0.31). Data from one longer-term study suggest that discontinuing a cholinesterase inhibitor is probably associated with worse cognitive function at 12 months (mean difference (MD) -2.09 Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE) points, 95% CI -3.43 to -0.75; moderate certainty). Discontinuation may make little or no difference to functional status in the short term (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.04; 2 studies; low certainty), and its effect in the medium term is uncertain (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.01; 2 studies; very low certainty). After 12 months, discontinuing a cholinesterase inhibitor probably results in greater functional impairment than continuing treatment (MD -3.38 Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS) points, 95% CI -6.67 to -0.10; one study; moderate certainty). Discontinuation may be associated with a worsening of neuropsychiatric symptoms over the short term and medium term, although we cannot exclude a minimal effect (SMD - 0.48, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.13; 2 studies; low certainty; and SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.08; 3 studies; low certainty, respectively). Data from one study suggest that discontinuing a cholinesterase inhibitor may result in little to no change in neuropsychiatric status at 12 months (MD -0.87 Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) points; 95% CI -8.42 to 6.68; moderate certainty). We found no clear evidence of an effect of discontinuation on dropout due to lack of medication efficacy or deterioration in overall medical condition (odds ratio (OR) 1.53, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.76; 4 studies; low certainty), on number of adverse events (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.27; 4 studies; low certainty) or serious adverse events (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.39; 4 studies; low certainty), and on mortality (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.55; 5 studies; low certainty). Institutionalisation was reported in one trial, but it was not possible to extract data for the groups relevant to this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that discontinuing cholinesterase inhibitors may result in worse cognitive, neuropsychiatric and functional status than continuing treatment, although this is supported by limited evidence, almost all of low or very low certainty. As all participants had dementia due to Alzheimer's disease, our findings are not transferable to other dementia types. We were unable to determine whether the effects of discontinuing cholinesterase inhibitors differed with baseline dementia severity. There is currently no evidence to guide decisions about discontinuing memantine. There is a need for further well-designed RCTs, across a range of dementia severities and settings. We are aware of two ongoing registered trials. In making decisions about discontinuing these drugs, clinicians should exercise caution, considering the evidence from existing trials along with other factors important to patients and their carers.

Caregivers' perspectives and experiences of withdrawing acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine in advanced dementia: a qualitative analysis of an online discussion forum.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable uncertainty surrounding the medications used to delay the progression of dementia, especially their long-term efficacy and when to withdraw treatment with these agents. Current research regarding the optimal use of antidementia medication is limited, contributing to variability in practice guidelines and in clinicians' prescribing practices. Little is currently known about the experiences encountered by caregivers of people with dementia after antidementia medication is withdrawn. AIM: To investigate the experiences and perspectives of carers and family members when antidementia medications (cholinesterase inhibitors and/or memantine) are stopped, by analysing archived threads and posts of an online discussion forum for people affected by dementia. METHODS: Archived discussions from Talking Point, an online discussion forum hosted by the Alzheimer's Society UK, were searched for threads discussing antidementia medication withdrawal and relevant threads were analysed thematically using the Framework method. Participant demographics were not established due to usernames which ensured anonymity. RESULTS: Four key themes emerged: (1) expectations about withdrawal, (2) method of withdrawal, (3) clinical condition on withdrawal, and (4) the effect of withdrawal on caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Online discussion forums such as Talking Point provide dementia carers with an outlet to seek help, offer advice and share experiences with other members. The study findings highlight the complexity surrounding optimising dementia pharmacotherapy and antidementia medication withdrawal, highlighting the need for treatment to be person-centred and highly individualised.

"A tool doesn't add anything". The importance of added value: Use of observational pain tools with patients with advanced dementia approaching the end of life-a qualitative study of physician and nurse experiences and perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Observational pain tools (OPTs) are widely recommended in health care policies, clinical guidelines, and recommendations for pain assessment and management. However, it is unclear whether and how these tools are used for patients with advanced dementia approaching the end of life. AIM: To explore hospice, secondary, and primary care physicians' and nurses' use of OPTs with patients dying with advanced dementia and their perspectives on practice development and training needs. METHODS: Twenty-three physicians and 24 nurses with experience of caring for people dying with advanced dementia were recruited from primary care surgeries (n = 5), hospitals (n = 6), hospices (n = 4), and nursing homes (n = 10). Semistructured, face-to-face interviews were conducted. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis applied to identify core themes. RESULTS: Three key themes emerged: (1) use of OPTs in this vulnerable patient population, (2) barriers to the use of OPTs and lack of perceived "added value", and (3) perspectives on practice development and training in pain assessment in advanced dementia at end of life. Just over one-quarter of participants (n = 13) routinely used OPTs. Reasons for nonuse included perceived limitations of such tools, difficulties with their use and integration with existing practice, and lack of perceived added value. Most participants strongly emphasised a need for ongoing training and development which facilitated transfer of knowledge and multidisciplinary skills across professions and specialties. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals require ongoing support in developing and integrating change to existing pain assessment protocols and approaches. These findings have important implications for health education, practice, and policy.

Evaluation of the impact of telementoring using ECHO© technology on healthcare professionals' knowledge and self-efficacy in assessing and managing pain for people with advanced dementia nearing the end of life.

BACKGROUND: Pain assessment and management in advanced and end-stage dementia are challenging; patients are at risk of under-diagnosis, under-assessment and under-treatment. Previous research has highlighted the importance of needs-driven training and development in this area for physicians, nurses and healthcare assistants (HCAs) across specialties, disciplines and care settings. This study used teleconferencing technology to connect healthcare professionals across multiple settings and disciplines in real-time clinics, based on the Project ECHO© model. This paper reports the evaluation of the clinics by physicians, nurses and HCAs, including their knowledge and self-efficacy in pain assessment and management for patients with advanced and end-stage dementia. METHODS: A mixed method evaluation comprising quantitative survey of self-reported knowledge and self-efficacy pre- and post-ECHO clinic participation, and qualitative exploration of experiences of the clinics using focus group interviews. A census approach to sampling was undertaken. Pre- and post-ECHO evaluations were administered electronically using Survey Monkey software. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to explore differences in knowledge and self-efficacy scores pre- and post-ECHO clinic participation. Statistical significance was set a-priori at p = 0.05. Focus groups were video- and audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Braun & Clarke's model of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Eighteen healthcare professionals [HCPs] (physicians [n = 7], nurses [n = 10], HCA [n = 1]) and twenty HCPs (physicians [n = 10], nurses [n = 10]) completed pre- and post-ECHO evaluations respectively, reporting improvements in knowledge and self-efficacy on participation in ECHO clinics and perceived utility of the clinics. Seven HCPs (physicians [n = 2], nurses [n = 5]) participated in two focus groups. Four themes emerged: knowledge and skills development and dissemination; protected time; areas for improvement; and the future of ECHO. CONCLUSIONS: Telementoring clinics for HCP education and training in pain assessment and management in advanced and end-stage dementia demonstrate a positive impact on knowledge and self-efficacy of HCPs and highlight the value of a cross-specialty network of practice which spans across disciplines/HCP types, care settings and geographical areas. Further development of ECHO services in this and in other clinical areas, shows significant potential to support delivery of high-quality care to complex patient populations.

'There's a Catch-22' - The complexities of pain management for people with advanced dementia nearing the end of life: A qualitative exploration of physicians' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Pain management is a cornerstone of palliative care. The clinical issues encountered by physicians when managing pain in patients dying with advanced dementia, and how these may impact on prescribing and treatment, are unknown. AIM: To explore physicians' experiences of pain management for patients nearing the end of life, the impact of these on prescribing and treatment approaches, and the methods employed to overcome these challenges. DESIGN: Qualitative, semi-structured interview study exploring barriers to and facilitators of pain management, prescribing and treatment decisions, and training needs. Thematic analysis was used to elicit key themes. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 23 physicians, responsible for treating patients with advanced dementia approaching the end of life, were recruited from primary care ( n = 9), psychiatry ( n = 7) and hospice care ( n = 7). RESULTS: Six themes emerged: diagnosing pain, complex prescribing and treatment approaches, side effects and adverse events, route of administration, importance of sharing knowledge and training needs. Knowledge exchange was often practised through liaison with physicians from other specialities. Cross-speciality mentoring and the creation of knowledge networks were believed to improve pain management in this patient population. CONCLUSION: Pain management in end-stage dementia is complex, requiring cross-population of knowledge between palliative care specialists and non-specialists, in addition to collateral information provided by other health professionals and patients' families. Regular, cost- and time-effective mentoring and ongoing professional development are perceived to be essential in empowering physicians to meet clinical challenges in this area.

Antimicrobial Use in Patients with Dementia: Current Concerns and Future Recommendations.

Infections are common in people with dementia, and antibiotic use is widespread, albeit highly variable, across healthcare settings and countries. The few studies conducted to date that consider the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing specifically for people with dementia focus on people with advanced dementia and suggest that much of the prescribing of antibiotics for these patients may be potentially inappropriate. We suggest that clinicians must consider a number of factors to determine appropriateness of antimicrobial prescribing for people with dementia, including the risks and benefits of assessing and treating infections, the uncertainty regarding the effects of antibiotics on patient comfort, goals of care and treatment preferences, hydration status, dementia severity and patient prognosis. Future research should examine antibiotic prescribing and its appropriateness across the spectrum of common infections, dementia severities, care settings and countries, and should consider how antibiotic therapy should be considered in discussions regarding treatment preferences, goals of care and/or advance care planning between clinicians, patients and families.

Polypharmacy and inappropriate medication use in patients with dementia: an underresearched problem.

Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are increasingly prevalent across healthcare systems and settings as global demographic trends shift towards increased proportions of older people in populations. Numerous studies have demonstrated an association between polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), and have reported high prevalence of PIP across settings of care in Europe and North America and, as a consequence, increased risk of adverse drug reactions, healthcare utilization, morbidity and mortality. These studies have not focused specifically on people with dementia, despite the high risk of adverse drug reactions and PIP in this patient cohort. This narrative review considers the evidence currently available in the area, including studies examining prevalence of PIP in older people with dementia, how appropriateness of prescribing is assessed, the medications most commonly implicated, the clinical consequences, and research priorities to optimize prescribing for this vulnerable patient group. Although there has been a considerable research effort to develop criteria to assess medication appropriateness in older people in recent years, the majority of tools do not focus on people with dementia. Of the limited number of tools available, most focus on the advanced stages of dementia in which life expectancy is limited. The development of tools to assess medication appropriateness in people with mild to moderate dementia or across the full spectrum of disease severity represents an important gap in the research literature and is beginning to attract research interest, with recent studies considering the medication regimen as a whole, or misprescribing, overprescribing or underprescribing of certain medications/medication classes, including anticholinergics, psychotropics, antibiotics and analgesics. Further work is required in development and validation of criteria to assess prescribing appropriateness in this vulnerable patient population, to determine prevalence of PIP in large cohorts of people with the full spectrum of dementia variants and severities, and to examine the impact of PIP on health outcomes.

Exploring healthcare assistants' role and experience in pain assessment and management for people with advanced dementia towards the end of life: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Pain assessment and management are key aspects in the care of people with dementia approaching the end of life but become challenging when patient self-report is impaired or unavailable. Best practice recommends the use of observational pain assessments for these patients; however, difficulties have been documented with health professionals' use of these tools in the absence of additional collateral patient knowledge. No studies have explored the role, perspectives and experiences of healthcare assistants in pain assessment and management in dementia; this study provides insight into this important area. METHODS: A qualitative approach was adopted, using key informant interviews with healthcare assistants caring for people with advanced dementia approaching the end of life in hospice, nursing home and acute care settings. Thematic analysis was the analytic approach taken to interpretation of interview data. Data were collected between June 2014 and September 2015. RESULTS: Fourteen participants took part in the study. Participants' average length of caring experience was 15.4 years and most were female. Three key themes emerged: recognising pain, reporting pain, and upskilling. Participants were often the first to notice obvious causes of pain and to detect changes in patient norms which signified hidden causes of pain. Comprehensive knowledge of resident norms enabled participants to observe for behavioural and nonverbal indicators of pain and distinguish these from non-pain related behaviours. Pain reporting was heavily impacted by relationships with professional staff and the extent to which participants felt valued in their role. Positive relationships resulted in comprehensive pain reports; negative relationships led to perfunctory or ambiguous reporting. Participants emphasised a desire for further training and upskilling, including in the use and reporting of basic pain tools. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare assistants are frontline staff who have a key role in direct patient care, spending a considerable amount of time with patients in comparison to other health professionals. These staff are often first to notice changes in patients that may signify pain and to alert professional staff. However, to ensure the quality of these reports, further efforts must be made in reversing stigma attached to this role and in upskilling these members of the healthcare team.

STOPPFrail (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in Frail adults with limited life expectancy): consensus validation.

Objective: to validate STOPPFrail, a list of explicit criteria for potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in frail older adults with limited life expectancy. Design: a Delphi consensus survey of an expert panel comprising academic geriatricians, clinical pharmacologists, palliative care physicians, old age psychiatrists, general practitioners and clinical pharmacists. Setting: Ireland. Subjects: seventeen panellists. Methods: STOPPFrail criteria were initially created by the authors based on clinical experience and literature appraisal. Criteria were organised according to the physiological system; each criterion accompanied by an explanation. Using Delphi consensus methodology, panellists ranked their agreement with each criterion on a 5-point Likert scale and provided written feedback. Criteria with a median Likert response of 4/5 (agree/strongly agree) and a 25th centile of ≥4 were included in the final list. Results: all panellists completed three Delphi rounds. Thirty criteria were proposed, 27 were accepted. The first two criteria suggest deprescribing medications without indication or where compliance is poor. The remaining 25 criteria include lipid-lowering therapies, alpha-blockers for hypertension, anti-platelets, neuroleptics, memantine, proton-pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists, anti-spasmodic agents, theophylline, leukotriene antagonists, calcium supplements, bone anti-resorptive therapy, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, corticosteroids, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors, alpha-1-selective blockers, muscarinic antagonists, oral diabetic agents, ACE-inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, systemic oestrogens, multivitamins, nutritional supplements and prophylactic antibiotics. Consensus could not be reached on the inclusion of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. Full consensus was reached on the exclusion of anticoagulants and antidepressants from the list. Conclusion: STOPPFrail comprises 27 criteria relating to medications that are potentially inappropriate in frail older patients with limited life expectancy. STOPPFrail may assist physicians in deprescribing medications in these patients.

Nurses' experiences of pain management for people with advanced dementia approaching the end of life: a qualitative study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore hospice, acute care and nursing home nurses' experiences of pain management for people with advanced dementia in the final month of life. To identify the challenges, facilitators and practice areas requiring further support. BACKGROUND: Pain management in end-stage dementia is a fundamental aspect of end-of-life care; however, it is unclear what challenges and facilitators nurses experience in practice, whether these differ across care settings, and whether training needs to be tailored to the context of care. DESIGN: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis to examine data. METHODS: Twenty-four registered nurses caring for people dying with advanced dementia were recruited from 10 nursing homes, three hospices and two acute hospitals across a region of the UK. Interviews were conducted between June 2014-September 2015. RESULTS: Three core themes were identified: challenges administering analgesia, the nurse-physician relationship, and interactive learning and practice development. Patient-related challenges to pain management were universal across care settings; nurse- and organisation-related barriers differed between settings. A need for interactive learning and practice development, particularly in pharmacology, was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving pain management in practice was highly challenging. A number of barriers were identified; however, the manner and extent to which these impacted on nurses differed across hospice, nursing home and acute care settings. Needs-based training to support and promote practice development in pain management in end-stage dementia is required. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses considered pain management fundamental to end-of-life care provision; however, nurses working in acute care and nursing home settings may be undersupported and under-resourced to adequately manage pain in people dying with advanced dementia. Nurse-to-nurse mentoring and ongoing needs-assessed interactive case-based learning could help promote practice development in this area. Nurses require continuing professional development in pharmacology.

Withdrawal of Antidementia Drugs in Older People: Who, When and How?

The evidence base to guide withdrawal of antidementia medications in older people with dementia is limited; while some randomised controlled studies have considered discontinuation of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs), no such studies examining discontinuation of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist memantine have been conducted to date. The purpose of this opinion article was to summarise the existing evidence on withdrawal of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine, to highlight the key considerations for clinicians when making these prescribing decisions and to offer guidance as to when and how treatment might be discontinued. Until the evidence base is enhanced by the findings of large-scale, randomised controlled discontinuation trials of ChEIs and memantine that use multiple, clinically relevant, cognitive, functional and behavioural outcome measures, clinicians' prescribing decisions involve balancing the risks of discontinuation with side effects and costs of continued treatment. Such decisions must be highly individualised and patient-centred.

Exploring the prevalence of and factors associated with pain: a cross-sectional study of community-dwelling people with dementia.

Few pain studies have made community-dwelling people with dementia (PWD) their focus. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of pain among this patient population and to explore medication use. Moreover, we sought to investigate patient and caregiver variables associated with the presence of pain. Community-dwelling PWD and their caregivers were recruited between May 2009 and July 2012 from outpatient memory clinics in Northern Ireland to take part in a face-to-face structured interview with a researcher. Patients' cognitive status and presence of depression were established. A full medication history was taken. Both patients and caregivers were asked to rate patients' pain, at the time of the interview and on an average day, using a 7-point verbal descriptor scale. From the 206 patients who were eligible to take part, 75 patient-caregiver dyads participated in the study (participation rate = 36.4%). The majority of patients (92.0%) had dementia classed as mild or moderate. Pain was commonly reported among the sample, with 57.3% of patients and 70.7% of caregivers reporting patient pain on an average day. Significant differences were found between patients' and caregivers' reports of pain. Two-fifths of patients (40.0%) were prescribed analgesia. Antipsychotic, hypnotic and anxiolytic drug use was low, whereas antidepressant drugs were prescribed more commonly. Presence of pain was unaffected by dementia severity; however, the use of prescribed analgesic medication was a significant predictor of the presence of pain in these patients, whether reported by the patient or their caregiver 'right now' or 'on an average day' (P < 0.001). Patient and caregiver recruitment was challenging, and remains a barrier to research in this area in the future.