Search

Objective To assess the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led intervention using validated tools to reduce medicine-induced deterioration and adverse reactions. Design and setting Multicenter, open-label parallel randomised controlled trial involving 39 Australian aged-care facilities. Participants Residents on ≥4 medicines or ≥1 anticholinergic or sedative medicine. Intervention Pharmacist-led intervention using validated tools to detect signs and symptoms of medicine-induced deterioration which occurred every 8 weeks over 12 months. Comparator Usual care (Residential Medication Management Review) provided by accredited pharmacists. Outcomes Primary outcome was change in Frailty Index at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in cognition, 24-hour movement behaviour by accelerometry, grip strength, weight, adverse events and quality of life. Results 248 persons (median age 87 years) completed the study; 120 in the interventionand, 128 in control arms. In total 575 pharmacist, sessions were undertaken in the intervention arm. There was no statistically significant difference for change in frailty between groups (mean difference: 0.009, 95% CI: −0.028, 0.009, P  = 0.320). A significant difference for cognition was observed, with a mean difference of 1.36 point change at 12 months (95% CI: 0.01, 2.72, P  = 0.048). Changes in 24-hour movement behaviour, grip strength, adverse events and quality of life were not significantly different between groups. Point estimates favoured the intervention arm at 12 months for frailty, 24-hour movement behaviour and grip strength. Conclusions The use of validated tools by pharmacists to detect signs of medicine-induced deterioration is a model of practice that requires further research, with promising results from this trial, particularly with regards to improved cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: there are several different frailty measures available for identifying the frail elderly. However, their predictive performance in an Australian population has not been examined. Objective: to examine the predictive performance of four internationally validated frailty measures in an older Australian population. Methods: a retrospective study in the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ALSA) with 2,087 participants. Frailty was measured at baseline using frailty phenotype (FP), simplified frailty phenotype (SFP), frailty index (FI) and prognostic frailty score (PFS). Odds ratios (OR) were calculated to measure the association between frailty and outcomes at Wave 3 including mortality, hospitalisation, nursing home admission, fall and a combination of all outcomes. Predictive performance was measured by assessing sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPVand NPV) and likelihood ratio (LR). Area under the curve (AUC) of dichotomised and the multilevel or continuous model of the measures was examined. Results: prevalence of frailty varied from 2% up to 49% between the measures. Frailty was significantly associated with an increased risk of any outcome, OR (95% confidence interval) for FP: 1.9 (1.4-2.8), SFP: 3.6 (1.5-8.8), FI: 3.4 (2.7-4.3) and PFS: 2.3 (1.8-2.8). PFS had high sensitivity across all outcomes (sensitivity: 55.2-77.1%). The PPV for any outcome was highest for SFP and FI (70.8 and 69.7%, respectively). Only FI had acceptable accuracy in predicting outcomes, AUC: 0.59-0.70. Conclusions: being identified as frail by any of the four measures was associated with an increased risk of outcomes; however, their predictive accuracy varied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]