Search

Aim The aims of this study were (1) to identify older patients' risk factors for drug-related readmissions and (2) to assess the preventability of older patients' drug-related revisits. Methods Post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial with patients aged >= 65 years at eight wards within four hospitals in Sweden. (1) The primary outcome was risk factors for drug-related readmission within 12 months post-discharge. A Cox proportional hazards model was made with sociodemographic and clinical baseline characteristics. (2) Four hundred trial participants were randomly selected and their revisits (admissions and emergency department visits) were assessed to identify potentially preventable drug-related revisits, related diseases and causes. Results (1) Among 2637 patients (median age 81 years), 582 (22%) experienced a drug-related readmission within 12 months. Sixteen risk factors (hazard ratio >1, P < 0.05) related to age, previous hospital visits, medication use, multimorbidity and cardiovascular, liver, lung and peptic ulcer disease were identified. (2) The 400 patients experienced a total of 522 hospital revisits, of which 85 (16%) were potentially preventable drug-related revisits. The two most prevalent related diseases were heart failure (n = 24, 28%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 13, 15%). The two most prevalent causes were inadequate treatment (n = 23, 27%) and insufficient or no follow-up (n = 22, 26%). Conclusion (1) Risk factors for drug-related readmissions in older hospitalized patients were age, previous hospital visits, medication use and multiple diseases. (2) Potentially preventable drug-related hospital revisits are common and might be prevented through adequate pharmacotherapy and continuity of care in older patients with cardiovascular or lung disease.

Background: Hospital discharge of older patients is a high-risk situation in terms of patient safety. Due to the fragmentation of the healthcare system, communication and coordination between stakeholders are required at discharge. The aim of this study was to explore communication in general and medication information transfer in particular at hospital discharge of older patients from the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCPs) across different organisations within the healthcare system. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using focus group and individual or group interviews with HCPs (physicians, nurses and pharmacists) across different healthcare organisations in Sweden. Data were collected from September to October 2021. A semi-structured interview guide including questions on current medication communication practices, possible improvements and feedback on suggestions for alternative processes was used. The data were analysed thematically, guided by the systematic text condensation method. Results: In total, four focus group and three semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 HCPs. Three main themes were identified: 1) Support systems that help and hinder describes the use of support systems in the discharge process to compensate for the fragmentation of the healthcare system and the impact of these systems on HCPs’ communication; 2) Communication between two separate worlds depicts the difficulties in communication experienced by HCPs in different healthcare organisations and how they cope with them; and 3) The large number of medically complex patients disrupts the communication reveals how the highly pressurised healthcare system impacts on HCPs’ communication at hospital discharge. Conclusions: Communication at hospital discharge is hindered by the fragmented, highly pressurised healthcare system. HCPs are at risk of moral distress when coping with communication difficulties. Improved communication methods at hospital discharge are n

Importance: Suboptimal use of medications is a leading cause of health care–related harm. Medication reviews improve medication use, but evidence of the possible benefit of inpatient medication review for hard clinical outcomes after discharge is scarce. Objective: To study the effects of hospital-based comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs), including postdischarge follow-up of older patients’ use of health care resources, compared with only hospital-based reviews and usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Medication Reviews Bridging Healthcare trial is a cluster randomized crossover trial that was conducted in 8 wards with multiprofessional teams at 4 hospitals in Sweden from February 6, 2017, to October 19, 2018, with 12 months of follow-up completed December 6, 2019. The study was prespecified in the trial protocol. Outcome assessors were blinded to treatment allocation. In total, 2644 patients aged 65 years or older who had been admitted to 1 of the study wards for at least 1 day were included. Data from the modified intention-to-treat population were analyzed from December 10, 2019, to September 9, 2020. Interventions: Each ward participated in the trial for 6 consecutive 8-week periods. The wards were randomized to provide 1 of 3 treatments during each period: CMR, CMR plus postdischarge follow-up, and usual care without a clinical pharmacist. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was the incidence of unplanned hospital visits (admissions plus emergency department visits) within 12 months. Secondary outcomes included medication-related admissions, visits with primary care clinicians, time to first unplanned hospital visit, mortality, and costs of hospital-based care. Results: Of the 2644 participants, 7 withdrew after inclusion, leaving 2637 for analysis (1357 female [51.5%]; median age, 81 [interquartile range, 74-87] years; median number of medications, 9 [interquartile range, 5-13]). In the modified intention-to-treat analysi, Title in dissertation list of papers: Effects of hospital-based comprehensive medication reviews including post-discharge follow-ups on older patients’ healthcare utilisation (MedBridge trial): a pragmatic cluster-randomised crossover trial

Purpose: There is a lack of knowledge about factors that influence the performance of comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) by multiprofessional teams in hospital practice. This study aimed to explore the facilitators and barriers for performing CMRs and post-discharge follow-up in older hospitalised patients from the healthcare professional perspective. Methods: Physicians and ward-based pharmacists were recruited from an ongoing trial at four hospitals in Sweden. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 physicians and 7 pharmacists. Interview topics were working processes, resources, competences, medication-related problems, intervention effects and collaboration. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Identified subthemes were categorised as facilitators or barriers and grouped into overarching main themes. Results: In total, 21 facilitators and 25 barriers were identified across all CFIR domains and grouped in 6 main themes: (a) CMRs and follow-up are needed, but not in all patients; (b) there is a general belief in positive effects; (c) lack of resources is an issue, although the performance of CMRs may save time; (d) pharmacists’ knowledge and skills are valuable, but they need more clinical competence; (e) compatibility with hospital practice is challenging, and roles and responsibilities are unclear and (f) personal contact at the ward is essential for physician-pharmacist collaboration. Conclusion: Multiple facilitators and barriers for performing CMRs and post-discharge follow-up in older hospitalised patients exist. These factors should be addressed in future initiatives with similar interventions by multiprofessional teams to ensure successful implementation and performance in hospital practice.

Rationale, aims, and objectives: Inappropriate medication prescribing and use amongst older patients is a major patient safety and health care problem. To promote appropriate medication prescribing and use, comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) by ward-based pharmacists, including follow-up telephone calls after hospital discharge, have been conducted in older patients in the context of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). One of the key actors in a CMR is the patient. To support the understanding of the effects of CMRs on patients' health outcomes and improve clinical practice, knowledge about the patient perspective is needed. We therefore aimed to explore older patients' experiences with, and views on, hospital-initiated CMRs and follow-up telephone calls by ward-based clinical pharmacists within an RCT. Methods: We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 15 patients (6694 years) and carers from four hospitals in Sweden. Discussion topics included communication, information, decision-making, and effects on the patient. Interviews took place after discharge, were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analysed using a framework approach. Results: In general, patients' experiences and views were positive. Seven key themes were identified: (a) feeling of being taken care of and heterogenous health effects; (b) the pharmacist is competent; (c) despite the unclear role of pharmacists, their involvement is appreciated; (d) patients rely on health care professionals for decision-making; (e) importance of being informed, but receiving and retaining information is problematic; (f) time, location, and other factors influencing the effectiveness of CMRs; and (g) generic substitution is a problem. Conclusions: Older patients generally have positive experiences with and views on CMRs and follow-up telephone calls. However, some factors, like the unclear role of the ward-based pharmacist and problems with receiving and retaining information, may ne

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Drug-related problems (DRPs) are a growing healthcare burden worldwide. In an ongoing cluster-randomized controlled trial in Sweden (MedBridge), comprehensive medication reviews (CMRs) including post-discharge follow-up have been conducted in older hospitalized patients to prevent and solve DRPs. As part of a process evaluation of the MedBridge trial, this study aimed to assess the intervention fidelity and process outcomes of the trial's interventions. METHODS: For intervention delivery, the percentage of patients that received intervention components was calculated per study group. Process outcomes, measured in about one-third of all intervention patients, included the following: the number of identified medication discrepancies, DRPs and recommendations to solve DRPs, correction rate of discrepancies, and implementation rate of recommendations. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The MedBridge trial included 2637 patients (mean age: 81 years). The percentage of intervention patients (n = 1745) that received the intended intervention components was 94%-98% during admission, and 40%-81% upon and after discharge. The percentage of control patients (n = 892) that received at least one unintended intervention component was 15%. On average, 1.1 discrepancies and 2.0 DRPs were identified in 652 intervention patients. The correction and implementation rates were 79% and 73%, respectively. Stop medication was the most frequently implemented recommendation (n = 293) and 77% of the patients had at least one corrected discrepancy or implemented recommendation. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The intervention fidelity within the MedBridge trial was high for CMRs during hospital stay and lower for intervention components upon and after discharge. The high prevalence of corrected discrepancies and implemented recommendations may explain potential effects of CMRs in the MedBridge trial.

Background: Medication reviews have been introduced as healthcare interventions to decrease inappropriate polypharmacy in older patients, but implementation in practice is challenging. Objective: This case study aimed to explore the events, actions and other factors that were involved in the implementation and sustainability of medication reviews in older patients by clinical pharmacists in Region Uppsala, Sweden. Methods: A case study design informed by change management principles (Kotter) and normalization process theory, consisting of a review of published and grey literature, key informant interviews and focus group triangulation. Findings from additional literature review and interviews were integrated into a final thematic analysis. Ten healthcare professionals, managers and policy makers participated as key informants. The study included data up to 2015. Results: Factors were identified across all Kotter's principles and normalization process theory domains, ranging from the first evidence on inappropriate polypharmacy in the 1980s until the creation of permanent clinical pharmacist positions in recent years. Examples of facilitating factors were a national focus on quality of care for the elderly, multiprofessional teamwork, key individuals with different professions, education, financial support and local evidence. Barriers included an unclear allocation of tasks and responsibilities, a lack of time and continuity, and a lack of a national plan for implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Conclusions: Multiple factors across the full range of change management and implementation principles were involved in the implementation and sustainability. A systems approach, including these factors, should be considered in similar future initiatives, both in Sweden and settings in other countries.

Background: Medication-related hospital admissions (MRAs) are frequently used to measure outcomes in studies involving medication reviews. The process of identifying MRAs is subjective and time-consuming, and practical, validated alternatives are required. Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a practical tool to identify MRAs. Setting Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden. Method: We reviewed existing literature on methods to identify MRAs. The tool AT-HARM10 was developed using an iterative process including content validity and feasibility testing. The tool's inter-rater reliability (IRR) and criterion-related validity (CRV) were assessed: four pairs of either final-year undergraduate or postgraduate pharmacy students applied the tool to one of two batches of 50 older patients' hospital admissions. Assessment of the same 100 admissions by two experienced clinicians acted as gold standard. Main outcome: measure Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa for IRR, and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value for CRV. Results AT-HARM10 consists of ten closed questions to distinguish between admissions that are unlikely to be and those that are possibly medication-related. The IRR was moderate to substantial (Cohen's kappa values were 0.45-0.75 and Fleiss' kappa values were 0.46 and 0.58). The sensitivity and specificity values were 70/86% and 74/70%, positive and negative predictive values were 73/74% and 71/83% respectively. Both AT-HARM10 and the gold standard identified approximately 50% of the admissions as MRAs. Conclusion: AT-HARM10 has been developed as a practical tool to identify MRAs and the tool is valid for use in older patients by final-year undergraduate and postgraduate pharmacy students.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity and its associated polypharmacy contribute to an increase in adverse drug events, hospitalizations, and healthcare spending. This study aimed to address: what exists regarding polypharmacy management in the European Union (EU); why programs were, or were not, developed; and, how identified initiatives were developed, implemented, and sustained. METHODS: Change management principles (Kotter) and normalization process theory (NPT) informed data collection and analysis. Nine case studies were conducted in eight EU countries: Germany (Lower Saxony), Greece, Italy (Campania), Poland, Portugal, Spain (Catalonia), Sweden (Uppsala), and the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland and Scotland). The workflow included a review of country/region specific polypharmacy policies, key informant interviews with stakeholders involved in policy development and implementation and, focus groups of clinicians and managers. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis of individual cases and framework analysis across cases. RESULTS: Polypharmacy initiatives were identified in five regions (Catalonia, Lower Saxony, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Uppsala) and included all care settings. There was agreement, even in cases without initiatives, that polypharmacy is a significant issue to address. Common themes regarding the development and implementation of polypharmacy management initiatives were: locally adapted solutions, organizational culture supporting innovation and teamwork, adequate workforce training, multidisciplinary teams, changes in workflow, redefinition of roles and responsibilities of professionals, policies and legislation supporting the initiative, and data management and information and communication systems to assist development and implementation. Depending on the setting, these were considered either facilitators or barriers to implementation. CONCLUSION: Within the studied EU countries, polypharmacy management was not widely addressed. These results, Jennifer McIntosh and Albert Alonso contributed equally to this work.

BACKGROUND: Mismanaged prescribing and use of medication among elderly puts major pressure on current healthcare systems. Performing a medication review, a structured critical examination of a patient's medications, during hospital stay with active follow-up into primary care could optimise treatment benefit and minimise harm. However, a lack of high quality evidence inhibits widespread implementation. This manuscript describes the rationale and design of a pragmatic cluster-randomised, crossover trial to fulfil this need for evidence. AIM: To study the effects of hospital-initiated comprehensive medication reviews, including active follow-up, on elderly patients' healthcare utilisation compared to 1) usual care and 2) solely hospital based reviews. DESIGN: Multicentre, three-treatment, replicated, cluster-randomised, crossover trial. SETTING: 8 wards with a multidisciplinary team within 4 hospitals in 3 Swedish counties. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 65years or older, admitted to one of the study wards. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Palliative stage; residing in other than the hospital's county; medication review within the last 30days; one-day admission. INTERVENTIONS: 1, comprehensive medication review during hospital stay; 2, same as 1 with the addition of active follow-up into primary care; 3, usual care. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Incidence of unplanned hospital visits during a 12-month follow-up period. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSES: Extraction and collection from the counties' medical record system into a GCP compliant electronic data capture system. Intention-to-treat-analyses using hierarchical models. RELEVANCE: This study has a high potential to show a reduction in elderly patients' morbidity, contributing to more sustainable healthcare in the long run.

Background Inappropriate use of multiple medicines (inappropriate polypharmacy) is a major challenge in older people with consequences of increased prevalence and severity of adverse drug reactions and interactions, and reduced medicines adherence. The aim of this study was to determine the levels of consensus amongst key stakeholders in the European Union (EU) in relation to aspects of the management of polypharmacy in older people. Methods Forty-six statements were developed on aspects of healthcare structures, processes and desired outcomes, with consensus defined at >= 80% agreement. Panel members were strategists (e.g. directors, leading clinicians and commissioners) from each of the 28 EU member states, with a target recruitment of five per member state. Three Delphi rounds were conducted via email, with panel members being provided with summative results and collated, anonymised comments at the commencement of Rounds 2 and 3. Results Ninety panel members were recruited (64.3% of target), with high participation levels throughout the three Delphi rounds (91.1%, 83.3%, 72.2%). During Round 1, consensus was obtained for 27/46 statements (58.7%), with an additional two statements in Round 2 and none in Round 3. Consensus was obtained for statements relating to: potential gain arising from polypharmacy management (3/4 statements); strategic development (7/7); change management (5/7) indicator measures (4/6); legislation (0/3); awareness raising (5/5); polypharmacy reviews (5/7); and EU vision (0/7). Analysis of free text comments indicated that the vision statements were too ambitious and not achievable by the specified timeframe of 2025. Conclusion Consensus was obtained amongst key EU strategists around many aspects of polypharmacy management in older people. Notably, no consensus was achieved in relation to statements relating to the need to alter legislation in areas of healthcare delivery, remuneration and practitioner scope of practice. While the vision f

Objectives: Family health teams (FHTs), an interprofessional primary care practice model, were established in Ontario in 2005. As of October 2014, 191 FHT organizations were in operation, and 111 (58%) included one or several pharmacists. The objective of this study was to document the focus of pharmacist activities in FHTs. Approach: We invited all 155 known FHT pharmacists to a web-based survey. The survey was constructed using information obtained from previously done semi-structured telephone interviews with pharmacists working in FHTs. The survey consisted of a list of activities, grouped into 5 main categories, and participants were asked to estimate time spent on each category. Free-text response questions allowed participants to identify activities not listed. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis for open-ended responses. Results: Seventy (45%) pharmacists completed the survey. The mean respondent age was 43 years, and the average length of time working in an FHT was 4 years. All pharmacists reported being engaged in some form of direct patient care, including managing single therapeutic issues (96%), conducting general medication reviews (70%) and medication reconciliation after hospitalization (63%). Most reported providing education and drug information (83%). Pharmacists felt their work would increase patient medication adherence (94%) and physician adherence to recommended guidelines (86%), as well as reduce inappropriate prescribing (93%), polypharmacy (90%), emergency room and hospital utilization (70%-81%). Conclusion: Pharmacists in FHTs are strongly focused on direct patient care activities, managing specific medication issues and unstructured drug information to physicians. The majority of pharmacists reported that their activities had a substantial impact on patient medication use and health. The findings from this survey can assist pharmacists new to FHT practice, health policy planning and health resear