Search

Background: Inappropriate drug prescriptions for patients with polypharmacy can have avoidable adverse consequences. We studied the effects of a clinical decision-support system (CDSS) for medication management on hospitalizations and mortality., Methods: This stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized, controlled trial involved an open cohort of adult patients with polypharmacy in primary care practices (=clusters) in Westphalia-Lippe, Germany. During the period of the intervention, their medication lists were checked annually using the CDSS. The CDSS warns against inappropriate prescriptions on the basis of patient-related health insurance data. The combined primary endpoint consisted of overall mortality and hospitalization for any reason. The secondary endpoints were mortality, hospitalizations, and high-risk prescription. We analyzed the quarterly health insurance data of the intention- to-treat population with a mixed logistic model taking account of clustering and repeated measurements. Sensitivity analyses addressed effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and other effects., Results: 688 primary care practices were randomized, and data were obtained on 42 700 patients over 391 994 quarter years. No significant reduction was found in either the primary endpoint (odds ratio [OR] 1.00; 95% confidence interval [0.95; 1.04]; p = 0.8716) or the secondary endpoints (hospitalizations: OR 1.00 [0.95; 1.05]; mortality: OR 1.04 [0.92; 1.17]; high-risk prescription: OR 0.98 [0.92; 1.04])., Conclusion: The planned analyses did not reveal any significant effect of the intervention. Pandemicadjusted analyses yielded evidence that the mortality of adult patients with polypharmacy might potentially be lowered by the CDSS. Controlled trials with appropriate follow-up are needed to prove that a CDSS has significant effects on mortality in patients with polypharmacy.

Introduction: Clinically complex patients often require multiple medications. Polypharmacy is associated with inappropriate prescriptions, which may lead to negative outcomes. Few effective tools are available to help physicians optimise patient medication. This study assesses whether an electronic medication management support system (eMMa) reduces hospitalisation and mortality and improves prescription quality/safety in patients with polypharmacy., Methods and Analysis: Planned design: pragmatic, parallel cluster-randomised controlled trial; general practices as randomisation unit; patients as analysis unit. As practice recruitment was poor, we included additional data to our primary endpoint analysis for practices and quarters from October 2017 to March 2021. Since randomisation was performed in waves, final study design corresponds to a stepped-wedge design with open cohort and step-length of one quarter., Scope: general practices, Westphalia-Lippe (Germany), caring for BARMER health fund-covered patients., Population: patients (≥18 years) with polypharmacy (≥5 prescriptions)., Sample Size: initially, 32 patients from each of 539 practices were required for each study arm (17 200 patients/arm), but only 688 practices were randomised after 2 years of recruitment. Design change ensures that 80% power is nonetheless achieved., Intervention: complex intervention eMMa., Follow-Up: at least five quarters/cluster (practice). recruitment: practices recruited/randomised at different times; after follow-up, control group practices may access eMMa., Outcomes: primary endpoint is all-cause mortality and hospitalisation; secondary endpoints are number of potentially inappropriate medications, cause-specific hospitalisation preceded by high-risk prescribing and medication underuse., Statistical Analysis: primary and secondary outcomes are measured quarterly at patient level. A generalised linear mixed-effect model and repeated patient measurements are used to consider patient clusters within practices. Time and intervention group are considered fixed factors; variation between practices and patients is fitted as random effects. Intention-to-treat principle is used to analyse primary and key secondary endpoints., Ethics and Dissemination: Trial approved by Ethics Commission of North-Rhine Medical Association. Results will be disseminated through workshops, peer-reviewed publications, local and international conferences., Trial Registration: NCT03430336. ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03430336)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: BSM, RK-M, AIG-G, RH, JK-N, PK-M, NT, TB, LD, BS, BF, PI, SS, TSD, AP, IM, UK, HP, WG, FMG, HJT, CM report grants from the German Federal Joint Committee during the conduct of the study. DG reports grants from BARMER during the conduct of the study and family member works for and holds shares of IT company involved in the project. SG works for and holds shares of IT company involved in the project. SH, RP, PG declare that they have no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Formative evaluation of the implementation process for a digitally supported intervention in polypharmacy in Germany. Qualitative research was conducted within a cluster randomized controlled trial (C-RCT). It focused on understanding how the intervention influences behavior-related outcomes in the prescription and medication review process., Methods/setting: Twenty-seven general practitioners (GPs) were included in the study in the two groups of the C-RCT, the intervention, and the wait list control group. Behavior-related outcomes were investigated using three-step data analysis (content analytic approach, documentary method, and design of a model of implementation pathways)., Results: Content analysis showed that physicians were more intensely aware of polypharmacy-related risks, described positive learning effects of the digital technology on their prescribing behavior, and perceived a change in communication with patients and pharmacists. Conversely, they felt uncertain about their own responsibility when prescribing. Three main dimensions were discovered which influenced adoption behavior: (1) the physicians' interpretation of the relevance of pharmaceutical knowledge provided by the intervention in changing decision-making situations in polypharmacy; (2) their medical code of ethics for clinical decision making in the context of progressing digitalization; and (3) their concepts of evidence-based medicine on the basis of professional experiences with polypharmacy in primary care settings. In our sample, both simple and complex pathways from sensitization to adoption were observed. The resulting model on adoption behavior includes a paradigmatic description of different pathways and a visualization of different observed levels and applied methodological approaches. We assumed that the GP habitus can weaken or strengthen interventional effects towards intervention uptake. This formative evaluation strategy is beneficial for the identification of behavior-related implementation barriers and facilitators., Conclusion: Our analyses of the adoption behavior of a digitally supported intervention in polypharmacy revealed both simple and complex pathways from awareness to adoption, which may impact the implementation of the intervention and therefore, its effectiveness. Future consideration of adoption behavior in the planning and evaluation of digitally supported interventions may enhance uptake and support the interpretation of effects., Trial Registration: NCT03430336 , 12 February 2018.

Background: Medication reviews and medication management are being used more and more around the world to improve medication safety. Both of these tools were originally conceived as pharmaceutical care activities and have recently been developed into interdisciplinary approaches. We studied the efficacy of interprofessional medication management for multimorbid patients that takes their medical conditions, but also their general living situation into account., Methods: A comprehensive medication management was performed, which involved the collection of information on the drugs each patient took, the way they were stored, the patient's drug intake and handling, and any problems that arose with pharmacotherapy. The interventional approach was evaluated over a period of 15 months in a cluster-randomized controlled trial with a stepped wedge design. The primary endpoint was the quality of pharmacotherapy, as assessed with the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI). A mixed model was used to analyze efficacy., Results: 162 patients were enrolled in the study; 142 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (53.3% women, mean age 76.8 ± 6.3 years). The mean total MAI score decreased significantly (p ≤ 0.001) from the control phase (29.21, 95% CI [26.09; 32.33]) to the intervention phase (22.27 [19.00; 25.54]), with an effect strength (Cohen's d) of -0.24 [-0.36; -0.13]. The number of drug-related problems declined as well., Conclusion: In this study, interprofessional collaboration increased medication safety. Working across disciplinary boundaries allowed for a decrease in drugrelated problems and brought up aspects outside the purview of the primary care physician.