Rates and predictors of consideration for adjuvant radiotherapy among high-risk breast cancer patients: a cohort study.

Radiotherapy (RT) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) represents the standard for local control of breast cancer (BC). However, variations in practice persist. We aimed to characterize the rate of RT consideration (or referral) after BCS and identify predictors in Quebec, Canada, where universal health insurance is in place. A historical prospective cohort study using the provincial hospital discharge and medical services databases was conducted. All women with incident, non-metastatic BC (stages I-III) undergoing BCS (1998-2005) were identified. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) for RT consideration were estimated with a generalized estimating equations regression model, adjusting for clustering of patients within physicians. Of the 27,483 women selected, 90 % were considered for RT and 84 % subsequently received it. Relative to women 50-69 years old, younger and older women were less likely to be considered: ORs of 0.82 (95 % CI 0.73-0.93) and 0.10 (0.09-0.12), respectively. Emergency room visits and hospitalizations unrelated to BC were associated with decreased odds of RT consideration: 0.85 (0.76-0.94) and 0.83 (0.71-0.97). Women with regional BC considered for chemotherapy were more likely to be considered for RT: 3.41 (2.83-4.11). RT consideration odds increased by 7 % (OR of 1.07, 95 % CI 1.03-1.10) for every ten additional BCSs performed by the surgeon in the prior year. Social isolation, comorbidities, and greater distance to a referral center lowered the odds. Demographic and clinical patient-related risk factors, health service use, gaps in other aspects of BC management, and surgeon's experience predicted RT consideration.

Medication reconciliation at admission and discharge: a time and motion study.

BACKGROUND: Medication reconciliation at admission, transfer and discharge has been designated as a required hospital practice to reduce adverse drug events. However, implementation challenges have resulted in poor hospital adherence. The aim of this study was to assess the processes required to carry out medication reconciliation: the health professionals involved, the tasks and time devoted to medication reconciliation in general hospital settings. METHODS: A time-and-motion study design was used. Using a systematic sample of patients admitted and discharged from geriatric, medical and surgical units in two academic centers, health professionals involved in medication reconciliation were observed and timed. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the number of professionals involved, tasks performed, and mean time devoted. RESULTS: Up to 3 professionals from 2 disciplines (medicine and pharmacy) were involved in the medication reconciliation process. Geriatric reconciliations took the most time to complete at admission (mean: 92.2 minutes (SD = 44.3)) and discharge (mean: 29.0 minutes (SD = 23.8)), followed by internal medicine at admission (mean: 46.2 minutes (SD = 21.1)) and 19.4 (SD = 11.7) minutes at discharge) and general surgery minutes at discharge (mean: 9.9 minutes (SD = 18.2)). Considerable differences in order, type and number of tasks performed were noted between and within units. Tasks independent of direct patient interaction took more than twice the time required to complete than tasks requiring patient interaction. CONCLUSION: Lack of coordination, specialized training and agreement on the roles and responsibilities of professionals are among the most probable reasons for work-flow inefficiencies, possibly variability in quality, and time required for the current medication reconciliation process. A better understanding of the admission processes in general surgery is required. Standardization and use of electronic tools could improve efficiency and hospital adherence.

An evaluation of data quality in Canada's Continuing Care Reporting System (CCRS): secondary analyses of Ontario data submitted between 1996 and 2011.

BACKGROUND: Evidence informed decision making in health policy development and clinical practice depends on the availability of valid and reliable data. The introduction of interRAI assessment systems in many countries has provided valuable new information that can be used to support case mix based payment systems, quality monitoring, outcome measurement and care planning. The Continuing Care Reporting System (CCRS) managed by the Canadian Institute for Health Information has served as a data repository supporting national implementation of the Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI 2.0) in Canada for more than 15 years. The present paper aims to evaluate data quality for the CCRS using an approach that may be generalizable to comparable data holdings internationally. METHODS: Data from the RAI 2.0 implementation in Complex Continuing Care (CCC) hospitals/units and Long Term Care (LTC) homes in Ontario were analyzed using various statistical techniques that provide evidence for trends in validity, reliability, and population attributes. Time series comparisons included evaluations of scale reliability, patterns of associations between items and scales that provide evidence about convergent validity, and measures of changes in population characteristics over time. RESULTS: Data quality with respect to reliability, validity, completeness and freedom from logical coding errors was consistently high for the CCRS in both CCC and LTC settings. The addition of logic checks further improved data quality in both settings. The only notable change of concern was a substantial inflation in the percentage of long term care home residents qualifying for the Special Rehabilitation level of the Resource Utilization Groups (RUG-III) case mix system after the adoption of that system as part of the payment system for LTC. CONCLUSIONS: The CCRS provides a robust, high quality data source that may be used to inform policy, clinical practice and service delivery in Ontario. Only one area of concern was noted, and the statistical techniques employed here may be readily used to target organizations with data quality problems in that (or any other) area. There was also evidence that data quality was good in both CCC and LTC settings from the outset of implementation, meaning data may be used from the entire time series. The methods employed here may continue to be used to monitor data quality in this province over time and they provide a benchmark for comparisons with other jurisdictions implementing the RAI 2.0 in similar populations.

Doctor scores on national qualifying examinations predict quality of care in future practice.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine if national licensing examinations that measure medical knowledge (QE1) and clinical skills (QE2) predict the quality of care delivered by doctors in future practice. METHODS: Cohorts of doctors who took the Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Examinations Part I (QE1) and Part II (QE2) between 1993 and 1996 and subsequently entered practice in Ontario, Canada (n = 2420) were followed for their first 7-10 years in practice. The 208 of these doctors who were randomly selected for peer assessment of quality of care were studied. Main outcome measures included quality of care (acceptable/unacceptable) as assessed by doctor peer-examiners using a structured chart review and interview. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine if qualifying examination scores predicted the outcome of the peer assessments while controlling for age, sex, training and specialty, and if the addition of the QE2 scores provided additional prediction of quality of care. RESULTS: Fifteen (7.2%) of the 208 doctors assessed were considered to provide unacceptable quality of care. Doctors in the bottom quartile of QE1 scores had a greater than three-fold increase in the risk of an unacceptable quality-of-care assessment outcome (odds ratio [OR] 3.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-10.22). Doctors in the bottom quartile of QE2 scores were also at higher risk of being assessed as providing unacceptable quality of care (OR 4.24, 95% CI 1.32-13.61). However, QE2 results provided no significant improvement in predicting peer assessment results over QE1 results (likelihood ratio test: chi(2) = 3.21, P-value((1 d.f.)) = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Doctor scores on qualifying examinations are significant predictors of quality-of-care problems based on regulatory, practice-based peer assessment.

Pilot study of an interactive voice response system to improve medication refill compliance.

BACKGROUND: Sub-optimal adherence to prescribed medications is well documented. Barriers to medication adherence include medication side effects, cost, and forgetting to take or refill medications. Interactive Voice Response (IVR) systems show promise as a tool for reminding individuals to take or refill medications. This pilot study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of using an IVR system for prescription refill and daily medication reminders. We tested two novel features: personalized, medication-specific reminder messages and communication via voice recognition. METHODS: Patients enrolled in a study of electronic prescribing and medication management in Quebec, Canada who were taking chronic disease-related drugs were eligible to participate. Consenting patients had their demographic, telephone, and medication information transferred to an IVR system, which telephoned patients to remind them to take mediations and/or refill their prescriptions. Facilitators and barriers of the IVR system use and acceptability of the IVR system were assessed through a structured survey and open-ended questions administered by telephone interview. RESULTS: Of the 528 eligible patients who were contacted, 237 refused and 291 consented; 99 participants had started the pilot study when it was terminated because of physician and participant complaints. Thirty-eight participants completed the follow-up interview. The majority found the IVR system's voice acceptable, and did not have problems setting up the time and location of reminder calls. However, many participants experienced technical problems when called for reminders, such as incorrect time of calls and voice recognition difficulties. In addition, most participants had already refilled their prescriptions when they received the reminder calls, reporting that they did not have difficulties remembering to refill prescriptions on their own. Also, participants were not receptive to speaking to an automated voice system. CONCLUSION: IVR systems designed to improve medication compliance must address key technical and performance issues and target those individuals with reported memory difficulties or complex medication regimens in order to improve the utility of the system. Future research should also identify characteristics of medication users who are more likely to be receptive to IVR technology.

Physicians' response to computerised alerts for psychotropic drugs in older persons: a multilevel analysis of the associated alert, patient and physician characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: Computerised drug alerts are expected to reduce patients' risk of adverse drug events. However, physicians over-ride most drug alerts, because they believe that the benefit exceeds the risk. The purpose of this study was to determine the drug alert, patient and physician characteristics associated with the: (1) occurrence of psychotropic drug alerts for elderly patients and the (2) response to these alerts by their primary care physicians. SETTING: Primary care, Quebec, Canada. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-one physicians using an electronic prescribing and drug alert decision-support system in their practice, and 3413 elderly patients using psychotropic drugs. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY MEASURES: Psychotropic drug class, alert severity, patient risk for fall injuries and physician experience, practice volume and computer use were evaluated in relationship to the likelihood of having: (1) a psychotropic drug alert, (2) the prescription revised in response to an alert. Cluster-adjusted alternating logistic regression was used to assess multilevel predictors of alert occurrence and response. RESULTS: In total 13 080 psychotropic drug alerts were generated in 8931 visits. Alerts were more likely to be generated for male patients at higher risk of fall-related injury and for physicians who established the highest alert threshold. In 9.9% of alerts seen, the prescription was revised. The highest revision rate was for antipsychotic alerts (22.6%). Physicians were more likely to revise prescriptions for severe alerts (OR 2.03; 95%CI 1.39 to 2.98), if patients had cognitive impairment (OR 1.95; 95%CI 1.13 to 3.36), and if they made more visits to their physician (OR 1.05 per 5 visits; 95%CI 1 to 1.09). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians view and respond to a small proportion of alerts, mainly for higher-risk patients. To reduce the risk of psychotropic drug-related fall injuries, a new generation of evidence-based drug alerts should be developed.

The effectiveness of a new generation of computerized drug alerts in reducing the risk of injury from drug side effects: a cluster randomized trial.

CONTEXT: Computerized drug alerts for psychotropic drugs are expected to reduce fall-related injuries in older adults. However, physicians over-ride most alerts because they believe the benefit of the drugs exceeds the risk. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether computerized prescribing decision support with patient-specific risk estimates would increase physician response to psychotropic drug alerts and reduce injury risk in older people. DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial of 81 family physicians and 5628 of their patients aged 65 and older who were prescribed psychotropic medication. INTERVENTION: Intervention physicians received information about patient-specific risk of injury computed at the time of each visit using statistical models of non-modifiable risk factors and psychotropic drug doses. Risk thermometers presented changes in absolute and relative risk with each change in drug treatment. Control physicians received commercial drug alerts. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Injury risk at the end of follow-up based on psychotropic drug doses and non-modifiable risk factors. Electronic health records and provincial insurance administrative data were used to measure outcomes. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 75.2 years. Baseline risk of injury was 3.94 per 100 patients per year. Intermediate-acting benzodiazepines (56.2%) were the most common psychotropic drug. Intervention physicians reviewed therapy in 83.3% of visits and modified therapy in 24.6%. The intervention reduced the risk of injury by 1.7 injuries per 1000 patients (95% CI 0.2/1000 to 3.2/1000; p=0.02). The effect of the intervention was greater for patients with higher baseline risks of injury (p<0.03). CONCLUSION: Patient-specific risk estimates provide an effective method of reducing the risk of injury for high-risk older people. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00818285.

Using novel Canadian resources to improve medication reconciliation at discharge: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug events are responsible for up to 7% of all admissions to acute care hospitals. At least 58% of these are preventable, resulting from incomplete drug information, prescribing or dispensing errors, and overuse or underuse of medications. Effective implementation of medication reconciliation is considered essential to reduce preventable adverse drug events occurring at transitions between community and hospital care. An electronically enabled discharge reconciliation process represents an innovative approach to this problem. METHODS/DESIGN: Participants will be recruited in Quebec and are eligible for inclusion if they are using prescription medication at admission, covered by the Quebec drug insurance plan, admitted from the community, 18 years or older, admitted to a general or intensive care medical or surgical unit, and discharged alive. A sample size of 3,714 will be required to detect a 5% reduction in adverse drug events. The intervention will comprise electronic retrieval of the community drug list, combined with an electronic discharge reconciliation module and an electronic discharge communication module. The primary outcomes will be adverse drug events occurring 30 days post-discharge, identified by a combination of patient self-report and chart abstraction. All emergency room visits and hospital readmission during this period will be measured as secondary outcomes. A cluster randomization approach will be used to allocate 16 medical and 10 surgical units to electronic discharge reconciliation and communication versus usual care. An intention-to-treat approach will be used to analyse data. Logistic regression will be undertaken within a generalized estimating equation framework to account for clustering within units. DISCUSSION: The goal of this prospective trial is to determine if electronically enabled discharge reconciliation will reduce the risk of adverse drug events, emergency room visits and readmissions 30 days post-discharge compared with usual care. We expect that this intervention will improve adherence to medication reconciliation at discharge, the accuracy of the community-based drug history and effective communication of hospital-based treatment changes to community care providers. The results may support policy-directed investments in computerizing and training of hospital staff, generate key requirements for future hospital accreditation standards, and highlight functional requirements for software vendors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01179867.

Risk of injury associated with opioid use in older adults.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the dose-related risk of injuries in older adults associated with the use of low-, medium-, and high-potency opioids. DESIGN: Historical population-based cohort study: 2001 to 2003. SETTING: Quebec, Canada's, universal healthcare system. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred three thousand three hundred thirty-nine adults aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Population-based health databases were used to measure preexisting risk factors for injuries in 2001/02 and drug use and injuries during follow-up (2003). Type and dose of opioids were measured as time-dependent variables, as were other drugs that may increase the risk of injury from sedating side-effects or hypotension. The risk of injury per one adult dose increase in opioid dose was estimated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: During the follow-up year, 50.7% of the study population were prescribed drugs with sedating side effects, 15.3% were prescribed an opioid, 20.7% were concurrently using more than one sedating medication, and 3.7% were treated for an injury, fractures (55.1%) being the most common. After adjusting for concurrent drug use and baseline risk factors, low- (hazard ratio (HR)=1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.33-1.39) and intermediate-potency (HR=1.05, 95% CI=1.02-1.07) opioids were associated with the risk of injury. Use of codeine combinations was associated with the highest risk of injury, a 127% greater risk (HR=2.27, 95% CI=2.21-2.34) per one adult dose increase. (The mean World Health Organization standardized dose in the study population was 1.71 ± 0.85 adult doses.) CONCLUSION: Opioids increase the risk of injury in older adults, particularly codeine combinations.

Increasing the detection and response to adherence problems with cardiovascular medication in primary care through computerized drug management systems: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy is poor, resulting in an almost 2-fold increase in hospitalization. Treatment side effects, cost, and complexity are common reasons for nonadherence, and physicians are often unaware of these potentially modifiable problems. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a cardiovascular medication tracking and nonadherence alert system, incorporated into a computerized health record system, would increase drug profile review by primary care physicians, increase the likelihood of therapy change, and improve adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering drugs. METHODS: There were 2293 primary care patients prescribed lipid-lowering or antihypertensive drugs who were randomized to the adherence tracking and alert system or active medication list alone to determine if the intervention increased drug profile review, changes in cardiovascular drug treatment, and refill adherence in the first 6 months. An intention to treat analysis was conducted using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering within physician. RESULTS: Overall, medication adherence was below 80% for 36.3% of patients using lipid-lowering drugs and 40.8% of patients using antihypertensives at the start of the trial. There was a significant increase in drug profile review in the intervention compared to the control group (44.5% v. 35.5%; P < 0.001), a nonsignificant increase in drug discontinuations due to side effects (2.3% v. 2.0%; P = 0.61), and a reduction in therapy increases (28.5% v. 29.1%; P = 0.86). There was no significant change in refill adherence after 6 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: An adherence tracking and alert system increases drug review but not therapy changes or adherence in prevalent users of cardiovascular drug treatment. Targeting incident users where adverse treatment effects are more common and combining adherence tracking and alert tools with motivational interventions provided by multidisciplinary primary care teams may improve the effectiveness of the intervention.