The use of telehealth in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a survey of parents and caregivers.

The use of telehealth became widespread during the COVID-19 pandemic, including in child and adolescent attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) services. Telehealth is defined as live, synchronous phone and video appointments between a healthcare provider and a parent and/or child with ADHD. There is a dearth of research on the use of telehealth within this population. The aim of this study was to examine parents' and caregivers' perceptions of telehealth for children and adolescents with ADHD. A cross-sectional survey design was employed. Recruitment of parents and caregivers of children and adolescents with ADHD was conducted online. The survey asked participants about their views of telehealth, previous experience, and willingness to use telehealth. Quantitative data were analysed using STATA. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis. One hundred and twelve respondents participated in the survey. Participants were mostly female (n = 97, 86.6%) and aged between 45 and 54 (n = 64, 57.1%). Of the 61 (54.5%) participants with experience of telehealth, the majority reported that that they were at least satisfied with telehealth visits (n = 36, 59%), whilst approximately half rated their quality more poorly than in-person visits (n = 31, 50.8%). The majority of respondents (n = 91, 81.3%) reported that they would be willing to use telehealth for their child's future appointments. Most common reasons selected for wanting to use telehealth included saving time, improvements to the family routine, and reducing costs. Reasons selected for not wanting to use telehealth included not being able to receive hands-on care, belief that the quality of care is poorer than in-person consultations, and distraction of the child during telehealth visits. The study demonstrates that parents recognise deficits and benefits of telehealth, suggesting a need to build their trust and confidence in remote ADHD care.

Stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation of remote mental health consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Remote mental health consultations were swiftly implemented across mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research has begun to inform future design and delivery of telemental health services. Exploring the in-depth experiences of those involved is important to understand the complex, multi-level factors that influence the implementation of remote mental health consultations. The aim of this study was to explore stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation of remote mental health consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted whereby semi-structured, individual interviews were undertaken with mental health providers, service users, and managers (n = 19) to acquire rich information. Interviews were conducted between November 2021 and July 2022. The interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were analysed thematically using a deductive and inductive approach. RESULTS: Six themes were identified. The advantages of remote mental health consultations were described, including convenience and increased accessibility to care. Providers and managers described varying levels of success with implementation, citing complexity and incompatibility with existing workflows as barriers to adoption. Providers' access to resources, guidance, and training were notable facilitators. Participants perceived remote mental health consultations to be satisfactory but not equivalent to in-person care in terms of quality. Views about the inferior quality of remote consultations stemmed from beliefs about the inhibited therapeutic relationship and a possible reduction in effectiveness compared to in-person care. Whilst a return to in-person services was mostly preferred, participants acknowledged a potential adjunct role for remote consultations in certain circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: Remote mental health consultations were welcomed as a means to continue care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their swift and necessary adoption placed pressure on providers and organisations to adapt quickly, navigating challenges and adjusting to a new way of working. This implementation created changes to workflows and dynamics that disrupted the traditional method of mental health care delivery. Further consideration of the importance of the therapeutic relationship and fostering positive provider beliefs and feelings of competence are needed to ensure satisfactory and effective implementation of remote mental health consultations going forward.

Prevention of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized older patients with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy: the SENATOR* randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Multi-morbidity and polypharmacy increase the risk of non-trivial adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in older people during hospitalization. Despite this, there are no established interventions for hospital-acquired ADR prevention. METHODS: We undertook a pragmatic, multi-national, parallel arm prospective randomized open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE) controlled trial enrolling patients at six European medical centres. We randomized 1,537 older medical and surgical patients with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy on admission in a 1:1 ratio to SENATOR software-guided medication optimization plus standard care (intervention, n = 772, mean number of daily medications = 9.34) or standard care alone (control, n = 765, mean number of daily medications = 9.23) using block randomization stratified by site and admission type. Attending clinicians in the intervention arm received SENATOR-generated advice at a single time point with recommendations they could choose to adopt or not. The primary endpoint was occurrence of probable or certain ADRs within 14 days of randomization. Secondary endpoints were primary endpoint derivatives; tertiary endpoints included all-cause mortality, re-hospitalization, composite healthcare utilization and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: For the primary endpoint, there was no difference between the intervention and control groups (24.5 vs. 24.8%; OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.77-1.24; P = 0.88). Similarly, with secondary and tertiary endpoints, there were no significant differences. Among attending clinicians in the intervention group, implementation of SENATOR software-generated medication advice points was poor (~15%). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, uptake of software-generated medication advice to minimize ADRs was poor and did not reduce ADR incidence during index hospitalization.

International core outcome set for clinical trials of medication review in multi-morbid older patients with polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Comparisons of clinical trial findings in systematic reviews can be hindered by the heterogeneity of the outcomes reported. Moreover, the outcomes that matter most to patients might be underreported. A core outcome set can address these issues, as it defines a minimum set of outcomes that should be reported in all clinical trials in a particular area of research. The objective in this study was to develop a core outcome set for clinical trials of medication review in multi-morbid older patients with polypharmacy. METHODS: Firstly, eligible outcomes were identified through a systematic review of trials of medication review in older patients (≥65 years) and interviews with 15 older patients. Secondly, an international three-round Delphi survey in four countries involving patients, healthcare professionals, and experts was conducted to validate outcomes to be included in the core outcome set. Consensus meetings were conducted to validate the results. RESULTS: Of the 164 participants invited to take part in the Delphi survey, 150 completed Round 1, including 55 patients or family caregivers, 55 healthcare professionals, and 40 experts. A total of 129 participants completed all three rounds. Sixty-four eligible outcomes were extracted from 47 articles, 32 clinical trial protocols, and patient interviews. Thirty outcomes were removed and one added after Round 1, 18 outcomes were removed after Round 2, and seven after Round 3. Results were discussed during consensus meetings. Consensus was reached on seven outcomes, which constitute the core outcome set: drug-related hospital admissions; drug overuse; drug underuse; potentially inappropriate medications; clinically significant drug-drug interactions; health-related quality of life; pain relief. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a core outcome set of seven outcomes which should be used in future trials of medication review in multi-morbid older patients with polypharmacy.

Development of a standardized chart review method to identify drug-related hospital admissions in older people.

AIMS: We aimed to develop a standardized chart review method to identify drug-related hospital admissions (DRA) in older people caused by non-preventable adverse drug reactions and preventable medication errors including overuse, underuse and misuse of medications: the DRA adjudication guide. METHODS: The DRA adjudication guide was developed based on design and test iterations with international and multidisciplinary input in four subsequent steps: literature review; evaluation of content validity using a Delphi consensus technique; a pilot test; and a reliability study. RESULTS: The DRA adjudication guide provides definitions, examples and step-by-step instructions to measure DRA. A three-step standardized chart review method was elaborated including: (i) data abstraction; (ii) explicit screening with a newly developed trigger tool for DRA in older people; and (iii) consensus adjudication for causality by a pharmacist and a physician using the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre and Hallas criteria. A 15-member international Delphi panel reached consensus agreement on 26 triggers for DRA in older people. The DRA adjudication guide showed good feasibility of use and achieved moderate inter-rater reliability for the evaluation of 16 cases by four European adjudication pairs (71% agreement, κ = 0.41). Disagreements arose mainly for cases with potential underuse. CONCLUSIONS: The DRA adjudication guide is the first standardized chart review method to identify DRA in older persons. Content validity, feasibility of use and inter-rater reliability were found to be satisfactory. The method can be used as an outcome measure for interventions targeted at improving quality and safety of medication use in older people.

Identification of behaviour change techniques in deprescribing interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Deprescribing interventions safely and effectively optimize medication use in older people. However, questions remain about which components of interventions are key to effectively reduce inappropriate medication use. This systematic review examines the behaviour change techniques (BCTs) of deprescribing interventions and summarizes intervention effectiveness on medication use and inappropriate prescribing. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Academic Search Complete and grey literature were searched for relevant literature. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they reported on interventions in people aged ≥65 years. The BCT taxonomy was used to identify BCTs frequently observed in deprescribing interventions. Effectiveness of interventions on inappropriate medication use was summarized in meta-analyses. Medication appropriateness was assessed in accordance with STOPP criteria, Beers' criteria and national or local guidelines. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated by I-squared and Chi-squared statistics. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool for randomized controlled studies. RESULTS: Of the 1561 records identified, 25 studies were included in the review. Deprescribing interventions were effective in reducing number of drugs and inappropriate prescribing, but a large heterogeneity in effects was observed. BCT clusters including goals and planning; social support; shaping knowledge; natural consequences; comparison of behaviour; comparison of outcomes; regulation; antecedents; and identity had a positive effect on the effectiveness of interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In general, deprescribing interventions effectively reduce medication use and inappropriate prescribing in older people. Successful deprescribing is facilitated by the combination of BCTs involving a range of intervention components.

Longitudinal patterns of potentially inappropriate prescribing in early old-aged people.

PURPOSE: It is contentious whether potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is predominantly a phenomenon of late life or whether it has its origins in early old age. This study examined the pattern of PIP in an early old-aged population over 5 years. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of a population-based primary care cohort, of patients aged 60-74 years. Medication data were extracted from electronic patient records in addition to information on comorbidities and demographics. Explicit START criteria (PPOs) and STOPP criteria (PIMs) were used to identify PIP. Generalised estimating equations were used to describe trends in PIP over time and adjusted for age, gender and number of medicines. RESULTS: A total of 978 participants (47.8%) aged 60-74 years were included from the cohort. At baseline, PPOs were detected in 31.2% of patients and PIMs were identified in 35.6% at baseline. Prevalence of PPOs and PIMs increased significantly over time (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.07; 1.09 and OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.0; 1.06, respectively). A higher number of medicines and new diagnoses were associated with the increasing trend in both PPO and PIM prevalence observed over time, independent of PPOs and PIMs triggered by drug combinations. CONCLUSIONS: Potentially inappropriate prescribing is highly prevalent among early old-aged people in primary care and increases as they progress to more advanced old age, suggesting that routine application of STOPP/START criteria in this population would significantly improve medication appropriateness.

Use of a frailty index to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing and adverse drug reaction risks in older patients.

BACKGROUND: potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is a significant problem in health care today. We hypothesise that if doctors were given a single indicator of PIP and adverse drug reaction (ADR) risk on a patient's prescription, it might stimulate them to review the medicines. We suggest that a frailty index (FI) score may be such a suitable indicator. OBJECTIVES: to determine whether a positive relationship exists between a patient's frailty status, the appropriateness of their medications and their propensity to develop ADRs. Compare this to just using the number of medications a patient takes as an indicator of PIP/ADR risk. SETTING AND METHOD: a frailty index was constructed and applied to a patient database. The associations between a patient's FI score, the number of instances of PIP on their prescription and their likelihood of developing an ADR were determined using Pearson correlation tests and χ(2) tests. RESULTS: significant correlation between FI score instances of PIP was shown (R = 0.92). The mean FI score above which patients experienced at least one instance of PIP was 0.16. Patients above this threshold were twice as likely to experience PIP (OR = 2.6, P < 0.0001) and twice as likely to develop an ADR (OR = 2.1, P < 0.0001). Patients taking more than six medications were 3 times more likely to experience PIP. CONCLUSION: an FI score is a potentially relevant clinical indicator for doctors to critically assess a patient's prescription for the presence of PIP and ultimately prevent ADRs, especially when used in tandem with the number of medications a patient takes.

Doctors' perspectives on the barriers to appropriate prescribing in older hospitalized patients: a qualitative study.

AIMS: Older patients commonly suffer from multimorbidites and take multiple medications. As a result, these patients are more vulnerable to potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP). PIP in older patients may result in adverse drug events (ADEs) and hospitalizations. However, little has been done to identify why PIP occurs. The objectives of this study were (i) to identify hospital doctors' perceptions as to why PIP occurs, (ii) to identify the barriers to addressing the issues identified and (iii) to determine which intervention types would be best suited to improving prescribing. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), a tool used to apply behaviour change theories, were conducted with 22 hospital doctors. Content analysis was conducted to identify domains of the TDF that could be targeted to improve prescribing for older people. These domains were then mapped to the behaviour change wheel to identify possible intervention types. RESULTS: Content analysis identified five of the 12 domains in the TDF as relevant: (i) environmental context and resources, (ii) knowledge, (iii) skills, (iv) social influences and (v) memory/attention and decision processes. Using the behaviour change wheel, the types of interventions deemed suitable were those based on training and environmental restructuring. CONCLUSION: This study shows that doctors feel there is insufficient emphasis on geriatric pharmacotherapy in their undergraduate/postgraduate training. An intervention providing supplementary training, with particular emphasis on decision processes and dealing with social influences would be justified. This study has, however, uncovered many areas for potential intervention in the future.

Identification of Prescribing Errors in an Electronic Health Record Using a Retract-and-Reorder Tool: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to develop and to validate an adapted Retract-and-Reorder (RAR) tool to identify and quantify near-miss/intercepted prescribing errors in an electronic health record. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study between February and March 2021 in an Irish maternity hospital. We used the RAR tool to detect near-miss prescribing errors in audit log data. Potential errors flagged by the tool were validated using prescriber interviews. Chart reviews were performed if the prescriber was unavailable for interview. Errors were judged to be clinical decisions in chart reviews through review of narrative notes, order components, and patient's clinical history. Interviews were analyzed with reference to the London Protocol, a process of incident analysis that categorizes causes of errors into various contributory factors including patient factors, task and technology factors, and work environment. Logistic regression with robust clustered standard errors was used to determine predictors for near-miss prescribing errors. We calculated the positive predictive value of the RAR tool by dividing the number of confirmed near-miss prescribing errors by the total number of RAR events identified. RESULTS: Eighty-four RAR events were identified in 27,407 medication orders. Seventy-one events were confirmed near-miss prescribing errors, resulting in a positive predictive value of 85.0% (95% confidence interval, 75%-91%) and an estimated near-miss prescribing error rate of 259/100,000 medication orders. Duplicate prescribing errors were most common (54/71, 76.1%). No errors were reported by prescribers. Consultants were less likely to make an error than nonconsultant hospital doctors (adjusted odds ratio, 0.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.84). Factors associated with errors included workload, staffing levels, and task structure. CONCLUSIONS: Our adapted RAR tool identified a variety of near-miss prescribing errors not otherwise reported. The tool has been implemented in the study hospital as a patient safety resource. Further implementations are planned across Irish hospitals.

Patient and provider perspectives of the implementation of remote consultations for community-dwelling people with mental health conditions: A systematic mixed studies review.

Remote, or tele-, consultations became a necessary form of mental healthcare provision during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the prevalence of mental health problems rises, they may have a role in future mental health services. We aimed to review the literature on patient and provider perspectives on factors influencing the implementation of remote consultations for community-dwelling people with mental health conditions. We searched five electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) for empirical research up to July 13th, 2022. Only studies of synchronous, interactive remote consultations conducted via video, phone, or live-messaging between patients and providers were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. We integrated qualitative and quantitative data from 39 studies into a single mixed-methods synthesis. We mapped reported factors to the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Acceptability was generally high among participants, despite concerns about the quality of care and the perceived impeded therapeutic relationship. A prominent facilitator was the increased accessibility and convenience of remote consultations, while lack of appropriate infrastructure and low patient comfort and competence were among the most prevalent barriers. This review highlights the importance of patient preferences and provider buy-in to the future of remote consultations.

Educating pharmacy students through a pandemic: Reflecting on our COVID-19 experience.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pharmacy education worldwide has been immense, affecting students, educators and regulatory agencies. Pharmacy programmes have had to rapidly adapt in their delivery of education, maintaining standards while also ensuring the safety of all stakeholders. In this commentary, we describe the challenges, compromises and solutions adopted by our institution throughout the pandemic, the lessons learnt, adaptive measures taken, and strategies to develop and future-proof our curricula.

Impact of an electronic health record on task time distribution in a neonatal intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: An Electronic Health Record (EHR) has been introduced to four Irish maternity units, with further implementations planned. Previous studies indicate that healthcare professionals are concerned that EHRs may increase time spent on documentation and medication-related tasks. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of an EHR on task time distribution in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). METHODS: A pre-post, time and motion study. An electronic data collection tool was used to collate time spent on direct care, professional communication, reviewing charts, documentation, and medication-related tasks. Interruptions and contact with the patient zone were quantified. Statistical significance was assessed using two-sample proportion tests, two-sample t-tests, and two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. A Bonferroni correction set significance at p ≤ 0.0025. RESULTS: 63 doctors and nurses participated, with 169.23 h of data collected. There were no significant changes to nurses' task time distribution. The proportion of time spent by doctors on professional communication increased from 15.4% to 26.0% (p < 0.001). Significant increases to median task times were seen for both doctors and nurses. Interruptions to tasks decreased post-implementation (p < 0.001), as did frequency of contact with the patient zone (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The EHR did not redistribute time towards documentation and medication-related tasks. A reduction in interruptions to tasks may streamline workflow. Decreased contact with the patient zone may improve patient safety through reduced potential for pathogen transmission.

Implementation of telemedicine consultations for people with mental health conditions in the community: a protocol for a systematic review.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic response has led to an exponential increase in the use and spread of telemedicine internationally. In community mental health care settings, telemedicine services were implemented within a few weeks, with little time for rigorous planning. Despite the reported acceptability of telemedicine by patients and clinicians, barriers to its implementation have come to light. There is now a need to investigate these barriers, and facilitators, as telemedicine begins to show potential promise beyond the pandemic. We propose a review that aims to identify the factors affecting the implementation of telemedicine consultations for patients with mental health conditions in the community. Methods: A systematic review will be conducted and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. Five electronic databases will be searched using a pre-defined search strategy from 2016 to 2021. Only studies of synchronous, interactive telemedicine consultations conducted via video, phone or live messaging between patients and providers will be included. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies will be eligible for inclusion. Only studies published in the English language will be included. Titles and abstracts will be screened by two reviewers. Full text articles will be screened by a single reviewer, with a random 20% sample screened by a second reviewer. The methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) by two reviewers. Data will be extracted and tabulated to address the aims of the review. A narrative synthesis will be conducted and reported factors will be mapped to the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Conclusion: By identifying the factors that influence the implementation of telemedicine consultations for patients with mental conditions in the community, consideration can be given to both barriers and facilitators that could be addressed in future mental health services planning. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021273422 (04/10/2021).

The impact of health information technology on prescribing errors in hospitals: a systematic review and behaviour change technique analysis.

BACKGROUND: Health information technology (HIT) is known to reduce prescribing errors but may also cause new types of technology-generated errors (TGE) related to data entry, duplicate prescribing, and prescriber alert fatigue. It is unclear which component behaviour change techniques (BCTs) contribute to the effectiveness of prescribing HIT implementations and optimisation. This study aimed to (i) quantitatively assess the HIT that reduces prescribing errors in hospitals and (ii) identify the BCTs associated with effective interventions. METHODS: Articles were identified using CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science to May 2020. Eligible studies compared prescribing HIT with paper-order entry and examined prescribing error rates. Studies were excluded if prescribing error rates could not be extracted, if HIT use was non-compulsory or designed for one class of medication. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess study quality. The review was reported in accordance with the PRISMA and SWiM guidelines. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated across the studies. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise effect estimates. Two researchers examined studies for BCTs using a validated taxonomy. Effectiveness ratios (ER) were used to determine the potential impact of individual BCTs. RESULTS: Thirty-five studies of variable risk of bias and limited intervention reporting were included. TGE were identified in 31 studies. Compared with paper-order entry, prescribing HIT of varying sophistication was associated with decreased rates of prescribing errors (median OR 0.24, IQR 0.03-0.57). Ten BCTs were present in at least two successful interventions and may be effective components of prescribing HIT implementation and optimisation including prescriber involvement in system design, clinical colleagues as trainers, modification of HIT in response to feedback, direct observation of prescriber workflow, monitoring of electronic orders to detect errors, and system alerts that prompt the prescriber. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing HIT is associated with a reduction in prescribing errors in a variety of hospital settings. Poor reporting of intervention delivery and content limited the BCT analysis. More detailed reporting may have identified additional effective intervention components. Effective BCTs may be considered in the design and development of prescribing HIT and in the reporting and evaluation of future studies in this area.

Factors Affecting Prescriber Implementation of Computer-Generated Medication Recommendations in the SENATOR Trial: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The SENATOR trial intervention included the provision of computer-generated medication recommendations to physician prescribers caring for hospitalised older adults (≥ 65 years), with the aim of reducing in-hospital adverse drug reactions. Interim data analysis during the trial revealed that the prescriber implementation rates of the computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations were lower than expected across all six trial sites. AIM: The aim of this qualitative study was to identify the factors affecting prescriber implementation of the medication recommendations in the SENATOR trial. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with trial researchers and physician prescribers who were provided with SENATOR recommendations. Content analysis was used to identify the most relevant domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) that affected recommendation uptake. RESULTS: Ten trial researchers and fourteen prescribers were interviewed across the six trial sites. Eight TDF domains were found to be most relevant in affecting prescriber implementation: 'environmental context and resources', 'goals', 'intentions', 'knowledge', 'beliefs about consequences', 'memory, attention and decision processes', 'social/professional role and identity', and 'social influences'. Interviewees felt that there was often a disconnect between the time prescribers were reviewing the patient and the point at which the recommendations were provided. However, when recommendations were reviewed, prescriber inertia was highly pervasive, with a particular reluctance to make pharmacotherapy changes outside their own specialty. Implementation was facilitated by recommendations reaching a 'decision-maker', but this was often not possible as the software could not evaluate the entire clinical context of patients, and thus frequently produced recommendations of low clinical relevance. CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated that the clinical relevance of the SENATOR prescribing recommendations was a significant factor affecting their implementation. Whilst software refinement will be necessary to improve the quality of recommendations, future interventions will need to be multifaceted to overcome the complex prescriber specialty culture within the acute hospital environment.

Use of an e-Learning Educational Module to Better Equip Doctors to Prescribe for Older Patients: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The older patient population is significantly different from the younger adult population with regards to dose selection for a wide variety of drugs. Recent investigation of prescribing attitudes indicates that doctors feel there is insufficient distinction made between the two cohorts during their undergraduate education, and that doctors do not receive enough training in geriatric pharmacotherapy. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine if an online module, focused on geriatric pharmacotherapy, improves doctors' prescribing knowledge, as well as prescribing confidence, as applied to older patients. METHODS: The impact of an online educational module (SCRIPT) on hospital doctors' prescribing knowledge and confidence with regards to older patients was assessed by randomised controlled trial. Control and intervention groups completed assessments at baseline, 4 and 12 weeks. Primary outcome was difference in mean test scores. Student's t tests were used to analyse the data. Qualitative data on participant's confidence levels were also collected. RESULTS: Eighty participants completed the 12-week trial. The SCRIPT intervention resulted in a 22% difference in mean test scores between control and intervention groups at 4 weeks (23.12 marks versus 33.67 marks; p < 0.0001; 95% CI 8.13-12.97). This significance was maintained at 12 weeks. Thirty-four percent of participants in the intervention group rated themselves as 'confident' with regards to prescribing for older patients post-intervention compared with 12% in the control group. CONCLUSION: A short e-learning module focused on geriatric pharmacotherapy can significantly improve doctors' prescribing knowledge and confidence with regards to older patients. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02405975.

Challenges of deprescribing in the multimorbid patient.

Older patients often have multimorbidity, frequently resulting in polypharmacy. Independently, multimorbidity and polypharmacy are among the biggest risk factors for inappropriate medication, adverse drug reactions, adverse drug events and morbidity, leading to patient harm and hospitalisations. After a medication review, discontinuation of medication or deprescribing is one of the most common recommendations but is likely to be ignored. The deprescribing process includes some or all of the following elements: a review of current medications, identification of medications to be discontinued, a discontinuation regimen, involvement of patients and a review with follow-up. In addition to the complexity presented by prescribing or deprescribing for older multimorbid patients, other factors act as barriers to discontinuation of medications in these patients; these include interprofessional relationships, difficulties with medication reviews, deficiencies in knowledge and evidence and patients' preferences/resistance to change. These challenges are compounded by the need to manage the shared treatment of multiple conditions by several prescribers from different specialties based on disease-specific guidelines without evidence of effects on the older, frailer, multimorbid patients. The interdisciplinary effort in the treatment of such patients needs to improve to ensure that we treat the patient holistically and not just the individual conditions of the multimorbid patient, according to guidelines. We must first, however, equip prescribers to identify instances where deprescribing is appropriate and then make the necessary changes to pharmacotherapy.

Development of a core outcome set for medication review in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Medication review has been advocated to address the challenge of polypharmacy in older patients, yet there is no consensus on how best to evaluate its efficacy. Heterogeneity of outcomes reported in clinical trials can hinder the comparison of clinical trial findings in systematic reviews. Moreover, the outcomes that matter most to older patients might be under-reported or disregarded altogether. A core outcome set can address this issue as it defines a minimum set of outcomes that should be reported in all clinical trials in any particular field of research. As part of the European Commission-funded project, called OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in the Multimorbid elderly, this paper describes the methods used to develop a core outcome set for clinical trials of medication review in older patients with multimorbidity. METHODS/DESIGN: The study was designed in several steps. First, a systematic review established which outcomes were measured in published and ongoing clinical trials of medication review in older patients. Second, we undertook semistructured interviews with older patients and carers aimed at identifying additional relevant outcomes. Then, a multilanguage European Delphi survey adapted to older patients was designed. The international Delphi survey was conducted with older patients, health care professionals, researchers, and clinical experts in geriatric pharmacotherapy to validate outcomes to be included in the core outcome set. Consensus meetings were conducted to validate the results. DISCUSSION: We present the method for developing a core outcome set for medication review in older patients with multimorbidity. This study protocol could be used as a basis to develop core outcome sets in other fields of geriatric research.