Background: Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescription omissions (PPOs) have been widely explored, but few studies focused on patients aged 75 years and over. This study was planned to explore the demographic and clinical characteristics of the older patients admitted to Units for Integrated Continuous Care, and to assess the prevalence and potential predictors of PIMs and PPOs. Methods: An observational, retrospective, and multicenter study was performed on 135 patients aged 75 years or older (i.e., 75-84 years and ≥85 years). PIMs and PPOs were investigated by applying the Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) criteria. Results: The oldest-old patients (≥85 years) were less likely to come from a hospital, had fewer daily medications and a lower number of oral doses, but they presented a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, were more dependent on activities of daily living, and were less obese than those aged 75-84 years. Results showed a high prevalence of PIMs and PPOs in both age groups. The more common PIMs and PPOs were the same in both age groups. The oldest-old patients who suffered falls were more likely to have a prescription omission of vitamin D supplements. The PIM index was not significantly different between age groups but was higher in the oldest-old group. Conclusions: Patients with a higher number of prescriptions had a higher risk of PIMs. Regarding PPOs, male gender and fall risk were predictors in the youngest group, while the number of comorbidities was significantly associated with PPOs in the oldest group. This study supports the usefulness of the STOPP/START criteria to identify PIMs and PPOs in these patients, but more research is required to determine the potential adverse outcomes of PIMs and PPOs and their clinical and economic consequences.

Older adults often face several chronic illnesses that require them to take multiple medications. The increased number of prescribed medications has led to more complex medication regimens, putting older adults at a higher risk of potential drug-drug interactions, inappropriate medication prescribing, and adverse events. This study aimed to assess inappropriate prescribing practices, polypharmacy, medication regimen complexity, and their determinants in older adults.

A cross-sectional study was conducted among older adults (aged 65 years and above) who visited three referral hospitals in Asmara, Eritrea, between June and August, 2023. A stratified random sampling technique was used, and data were collected from patient prescriptions, medical cards, and through interviews with a questionnaire. Inappropriate medication prescribing was evaluated using STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions)/ START (Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment) criteria version 3. Potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) and medication regimen complexity (MRC) were assessed using Lexi-comp drug interaction checker and MRC index, respectively. Descriptive statistics, logistic regression, Pearson's correlation coefficient, independent samples t-test, one-way Analysis of Variance, and paired t-test were employed using IBM SPSS (version-26.0).

A total of 430 respondents, with a similar male to female ratio, were included. The prevalence of polypharmacy was 5.3% (95%CI: 3.2, 7.5). Moreover, the prevalence of clinically significant pDDI was 51% (95%CI: 46, 56). The most common medicines involved in clinically significant pDDIs were enalapril (n = 179) and acetylsalicylic acid (n = 124). The presence of chronic illness (AOR = 7.58, 95%CI: 3.73, 15.39) and the number of drugs prescribed (AOR = 2.80, 95%CI: 1.91, 4.10) were predictors of clinically significant pDDIs. The prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) were 27.4% (95% CI: 23.4, 31.8) and 13.3% (95% CI: 10.3, 16.7), respectively. The most common PIMs were long-acting sulfonylureas (n = 63) and aldosterone antagonists (n = 19). Besides, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) (n = 41) and cardio-selective beta-blockers (n = 14) were the most common PPOs identified. Age (AOR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.92, 0.98), presence of chronic illness (AOR: 1.51, 95% CI: 0.81, 2.80), and number of drugs prescribed (AOR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.51, 2.69) were significant factors associated with PIM. MRCI score was a significant determinant of PPO (AOR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.38). The mean (SD) of the overall MRCI score was 9.1 (3.7), with dose frequency being the major contributor. The number of drugs prescribed was a determinant of MRCI score (r = 0.625, p < 0.001).

Inappropriate medication prescribing and clinically significant drug-drug interactions were common among older adults, highlighting the need for immediate attention from policymakers, program managers, and healthcare professionals.

Efforts to reduce preventable medication-related harm through medication reviews have increased, but interventions often yield null-results regarding clinical outcomes. We conducted a systematic literature search in four data bases and summarised the available evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing medication reviews and usual care in hospitalised patients regarding hospital readmissions and all-cause mortality by random-effects meta-analyses. Effect size differences by methodological study differences were of special interest. The meta-analysis of all 24 trials on hospital readmissions, including 12,539 participants, showed a statistically significant 8 % decrease in hospital readmissions (risk ratio (RR) [95 % confidence interval]: (0.92 [0.88-0.97], p = 0.002). The number of patient contacts was the most prominent effect modifier in meta-regression (p = 0.003) and the effect of medication reviews was approximately twice as strong (15 %) in 11 trials with 2 or more patient contacts (0.85 [0.78-0.92], p < 0.001). No statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality was observed in a meta-analysis of all 22 trials with data for this outcome (0.95 [0.86-1.04], p = 0.24), including 12,350 participants. The method of mortality assessment was identified as an effect modifier by meta-regression (p = 0.01). A meta-analysis of 10 trials with complete mortality ascertainment via registries or primary care data showed a significantly 19 % reduced mortality (0.81 [0.70-0.94], p < 0.01). In conclusion, medication reviews reduce the risk of hospital readmission and might also reduce all-cause mortality. Comprehensive mortality assessment was essential for successful trials. Clinical guidelines should recommend medication reviews with multiple patient contacts, involving pharmacists, either for repeated medication reviews or to improve adherence.

Older adults often have polypharmacy and multimorbidity. Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the most common multimorbidities in older adults and are linked to wide range of adverse drug effects and drug-related problems. The medication appropriateness index (MAI) has been widely used in several patient settings to assess Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIM) prescribing in older adults.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate PIM prescribing in cardiovascular disease outpatient clinic. It also aimed at assessing the validity of the MAI to detect and quantify PIMs specifically in CVD outpatient clinics.

This was a cross-sectional, single-center study in cardiovascular outpatient setting. Demographic, clinical, and medication information from older adults (≥ 65 years old) were collected and reviewed. Two clinical pharmacists randomly selected 70 patients, evaluated 539 medications, and assessed their appropriateness using the MAI. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) descriptive and logistic regression analyses was to calculate the number of PIMs, the MAI scores, and factors associated with PIM prescribing.

Our data showed that 87.1 % of patients had at least one PIM and the number of PIMs per patient was 2.10. Approximately 60 % of the patients had an MAI weighted score of zero (no prescription error). The mean MAI score per patient was 17.61 and the mean MAI score per medication was 2.72. The overall agreement between the two raters was 87.3 % with moderate chance-adjusted agreement as indicated by the kappa static of 0.43. The factors that were associated with increased PIM prescribing were the total number of medications and being ≥85 years old.

A relatively high prevalence of PIMs was found in the studied population. The MAI is a reliable and valid tool to detect PIM prescribing in CVD outpatient clinics. It mandates implementing specific measures to reduce PIMs.

Care transitions, specifically hospital discharge, hold a risk for drug-related problems and medication errors. Effective interventions that optimise medication use during and after transitions are needed, yet there is no standardisation of the outcomes. This literature review aimed at collecting outcomes from studies investigating how to optimise medication use of patients following hospital discharge, and to categorise them, as a first step in the development of a core outcome set.

We systematically reviewed quantitative and qualitative literature using Embase, PubMed, CINAHL and the EU Clinical Trial Register databases. Studies investigating the optimisation of medication use following hospital discharge were eligible. The quantitative literature review specifically included trials and protocols that evaluated the effect of an intervention for patients ≥ 65 years or multimorbid / polypharmacy patients, as they are at high risk of drug-related problems. The qualitative literature review focused on the patients' and healthcare professionals' views. Outcomes were summarised into unique outcome terms and categorised using an adapted version of the OMERACT filter 2.0.

The review included 75 quantitative and 20 qualitative studies. The interventions investigated in the quantitative literature mostly had multiple components performed either pre- or post-discharge. Sixty percent of the qualitative studies addressed the views of healthcare professionals, 40% the views of patients, and only one study addressed both. A median of 5 outcomes (range 1-17) were reported in the quantitative studies. In total, 91 unique outcomes were identified from the quantitative or qualitative literature, or both (73, 12 and 6 outcomes, respectively). Outcomes were categorised into five domains: 'medication' (n = 32 outcomes), 'economic impact/resource use' (n = 26), 'life impact' (n = 16), 'pathophysiological manifestations' (n = 15) and 'death' (n = 2). The top 5 most frequently measured outcomes in quantitative studies were number of readmissions (n = 54/75, 72%), mortality (n = 30/75, 40%), number of emergency department visits (n = 26/75, 35%), number of outpatient physician visits (n = 12/75, 16%), and medication adherence (n = 12/75, 16%).

This study identified a large number of different outcomes, especially in the domains medication and economic impact/resource use. This heterogeneity impedes the identification of effective interventions and confirms the need for a core outcome set.

Background Patients with hip fractures tend to have a poor prognosis. Although guideline-compliant practices are known to improve patient outcomes, there is a lack of evidence regarding the use of intervention to improve guideline adherence in hip fracture patients. The objective of our study was to evaluate guideline adherence by internists providing care to patients with hip fractures, using a protocol developed based on various guidelines. Method Protocol-driven care for hip fracture patients by internists began in April 2018 at our hospital. After its initiation, orthopedic surgeons performed the surgery, and the internists provided all other medical care. A controlled interrupted time-series analysis was used to evaluate the effects of protocol-driven care on guideline adherence to compare our hospital with other hospitals, using data extracted from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database covering the period April 2014 to March 2023. Results A total of 221,620 inpatients from 373 hospitals were included in the study. The initiation of protocol-driven care was associated with the guideline-recommended prescriptions: osteoporosis medication (Incidence rate ratio (IRR): 8.09; 95% CI 4.02-17.74), acetaminophen (IRR: 2.11; 95% CI 1.55-2.90), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (IRR: 0.16; 95% CI 0.11-0.24), and opioids (IRR: 5.96; 95% CI 3.14-12.15). However, there was no effect on the proportion of benzodiazepine prescriptions, surgery within 48 hours, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, or other perioperative outcomes, including medical fees. Conclusions The initiation of protocol-driven care by internists resulted in improved adherence to osteoporosis medication prescriptions and postoperative analgesic use compared with orthopedic care. This approach can be used as an effective method of care for elderly patients undergoing surgery.

Deprescribing is defined as the reduction of medications to improve patient care. For effective deprescribing regular evaluation of medication adjustment regimens is required as it is documented to be an effective method to reduce polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications while improving patient well-being. Several factors, including patient-related aspects, influence the deprescribing process. Among these factors, patient willingness plays a pivotal role, making it essential to better understand their perspectives and attitudes towards medication use and deprescribing to successfully implement and maintain a deprescribing approach. We investigated the attitudes of older patients attending geriatric clinics in Kuwait toward deprescribing and identified predictors that influence their willingness to undergo this process. We enrolled patients aged ≥65 years who were attending geriatric clinics in primary care settings in Kuwait. These participants completed the revised Arabic version of the Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed to assess the participants' willingness to participate actively in medication decision-making and their inclination toward discontinuing certain medicines. Descriptive statistics was applied to gain insight into the characteristics of the participants and their responses to the rPATD questionnaire. Binary logistic regression identified predictors influencing the desire to deprescribe among participants. The study included 535 participants, out of which 388 were analyzed, with 233 (43.6%) being women. The majority, 77% (n = 412), were aged between 65 and 74 years. Out of the total, 205 patients (38.4%) had one to two medical conditions and were prescribed between one and five medications. The participants showed a high willingness to deprescribe, and this willingness was inversely associated with sex (p = 0.15), age (p = 0.15), and polypharmacy (p = 0.044). Many older patients visiting geriatric clinics in primary care settings in Kuwait were receptive to the concept of deprescribing medications, particularly if advised by their doctor. Nevertheless, it was observed that male patients, individuals on more than 5 medications, and older age groups showed lower willingness to deprescribe.

Medication reviews (MRs) are a well-described initiative that improves health outcomes for polypharmacy patients. However, there is limited knowledge about the performance of medication reviews carried out in general practice especially under the leadership of hospital clinical pharmacists. When developing complex interventions, such as MRs, it is essential to describe the development process to ensure transparency and avoid research waste.

Thus, this study aimed to describe the steps of developing a new MR intervention targeting general practice to ensure transparency and transferability.

A stepwise approach inspired by the Medical Research Council framework was utilised in the process, covering two of the phases, i.e., development and feasibility, divided into four steps: 1) intervention drafting by a literature search, 2) expert opinion, 3) pilot testing in general practice clinics, and 4) evaluation of quantitative MR data.

Based on the results from the first three steps, four main themes which influenced the success of the MR intervention were identified: general practitioner resources, patient involvement, implementation difficulties and interdisciplinarity. These themes guided the pilot evaluation in step four.

A new feasible, complex MR intervention utilising clinical pharmacists in general practice involving hospital clinical pharmacists in a real-life setting was developed.

Polypharmacy is frequently used as a quality indicator for older adults in Residential Aged Care Facilities (RACFs) and is measured using a range of definitions. The impact of data source choice on polypharmacy rates and the implications for monitoring and benchmarking remain unclear. We aimed to determine polypharmacy rates (≥9 concurrent medicines) by using prescribed and administered data under various scenarios, leveraging electronic data from 30 RACFs.

A longitudinal cohort study of 5662 residents in New South Wales, Australia. Both prescribed and administered polypharmacy rates were calculated biweekly from January 2019 to September 2022, providing 156 assessment times. 12 different polypharmacy rates were computed separately using prescribing and administration data and incorporating different combinations of items: medicines and non-medicinal products, any medicines and regular medicines across four scenarios: no, 1-week, 2-week and 4-week look-back periods. Generalised estimating equation models were employed to identify predictors of discrepancies between prescribed and administered polypharmacy.

Polypharmacy rates among residents ranged from 33.9% using data on administered regular medicines with no look-back period to 63.5% using prescribed medicines and non-medicinal products with a 4-week look-back period. At each assessment time, the differences between prescribed and administered polypharmacy rates were consistently more than 10.0%, 4.5%, 3.5% and 3.0%, respectively, with no, 1-week, 2-week and 4-week look-back periods. Diabetic residents faced over two times the likelihood of polypharmacy discrepancies compared with counterparts, while dementia residents consistently showed reduced likelihood across all analyses.

We found notable discrepancies between polypharmacy rates for prescribed and administered medicines. We recommend a review of the guidance for calculating and interpreting polypharmacy for national quality indicator programmes to ensure consistent measurement and meaningful reporting.

Polypharmacy is a primary risk factor for the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and ultimately, adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Medication review and deprescribing represent effective strategies to simplify therapeutic regimens, minimize risks, and reduce PIM prescriptions. This systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental and observational studies aimed to evaluate the impact of different medication review and deprescribing interventions in hospitalized older patients.

Experimental and observational prospective cohort studies evaluating the clinical effects of medication review and deprescribing strategies in older hospitalized patients were searched in the bibliographic databases, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, from inception until January 8, 2024. A narrative synthesis of the results was provided, along with a meta-analysis of dichotomous data (i.e., re-hospitalizations and mortality).

Overall, 21 randomized controlled trials, 7 non-randomized interventional studies, and 2 prospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 14 (46.7%) assessed medication appropriateness as the primary outcome, while the remaining evaluated clinical outcomes (e.g., length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and incidence of ADRs) and/or quality of life. The meta-analysis revealed a slight but statistically significant 8% reduction in hospital readmissions (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85-0.99) following medication review and deprescribing, but no significant impact on mortality (HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Of the 30 included studies, 21 were considered at high risk of bias, mostly due to potential deviations from intended interventions and randomization processes. The remaining nine studies had "some concerns" (eight studies) or were considered at "low" risk of bias (one study).

Medication review and deprescribing are associated with potential benefits in reducing hospital readmission rates among hospitalized older patients, particularly through the reduction of PIM prescriptions. The integration of thorough medication review and deprescribing protocols in hospital settings may improve post-discharge outcomes and reduce overall healthcare costs.

Previous systematic reviews suggest that deprescribing may improve survival, particularly in frail older people. Evidence is rapidly accumulating, suggesting a need for an updated review of the literature.

We updated a 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis to include studies published from inception to 26 April 2024 from specified databases. Studies in which older people had at least one medication deprescribed were included and grouped by study designs and targeted medications. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa tool. Odds ratios (OR) or mean differences were calculated as the effect measures using either the Mantel-Haenszel or generic inverse-variance method with fixed- or random-effects meta-analyses. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were adverse drug withdrawal events, physical health, cognitive function, quality of life and effect on medication regimen. Subgroup analyses were performed based on age and intervention types.

A total of 259 studies (reported in 286 papers) were included in this updated review. Deprescribing polypharmacy did not result in a significant reduction in mortality in both randomized (OR 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.09) and non-randomized studies (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.36-1.38). Further subgroup analyses of randomized studies on deprescribing polypharmacy demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality in the young old (aged 65-79) (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-0.99) and when patient-specific interventions were applied (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99).

Deprescribing can be achieved with potentially important benefits in terms of improved survival, particularly when patient-specific interventions are applied and initiated early in the young old.

The aim of this study is to analyze the association between the degree of frailty and inappropriate prescribing patterns at admission to an Acute Care of the Elderly Unit (ACE Unit).

Prospective observational study conducted in the ACE Unit of an acute hospital in Barcelona city between June and August 2021. Epidemiological and demographic data were collected during hospitalization. Comprehensive geriatric assessment was performed on admitted patients. We recorded frailty (FRAIL scale), extreme polypharmacy (10 or more drugs), central nervous system potentially inappropriate medications-PIMs (STOPP-CNS or group D), cardiovascular potential prescribing omissions-PPOs (START-CV or group A), and anticholinergic burden using the drug burden index (DBI).

Ninety-three patients were included, of whom 48 (51.6%) were male, with a mean age of 82.83 (SD 7.53) years. The main diagnosis upon admission was heart failure in 34 patients (36.6%). Frail patients were older, with more dependence of activities of daily living and more comorbidity than non-frail patients. Additionally, frail patients demonstrated more omissions according to the START-A criteria. No statistically significant differences were observed in term of extreme polypharmacy, PIMs, or anticholinergic burden.

In the current study we found an association between frailty and inappropriate prescribing, specifically with regard to omissions using the START criteria for the cardiovascular system (group A). Notably, frail patients exhibited more omissions compared to their non-frail counterparts, and this difference was statistically significant.

The aim of this study is to assess the cost savings from medication reviews conducted for individuals living in nursing homes in Estonia. Medication reviews performed as part of the automated dose dispensing (ADD) service by community pharmacies might help identify suboptimal medicine regimens.

We use a case study approach to identify suboptimal use of medication in treatment plans and estimate the potential cost saving from medication reviews. To achieve this, we assess 101 treatment plans submitted for medication review by nursing homes in Estonia between 2021 and 2023. Additionally, we run OLS regressions to identify the most important determinants of medication cost savings.

We estimate an average direct cost saving of €43.62 per patient per year, which corresponds to 8.27% of the average annual medication costs. If medication reviews were conducted for all elderly individuals over 75 years old who use six or more prescription medicines, nearly 2% of Estonia's pharmaceutical budget could be saved. Regression analysis indicates that the most significant contributors to these cost savings are suboptimal use of generics, incorrect dosages (too high), and the elimination of incorrect medications.

Our study suggests that annual medication reviews conducted as part of the ADD service might help reduce medication expenditure when offered to a wider public.

To adapt the 2015 Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) criteria to older nursing home patients with a limited life expectancy of 1.5 to 2 years.

A modified Delphi consensus study.

The study was established in The Netherlands and conducted online. The international panel consisted of 23 experts with experience in medicine for older people.

The expert panel was presented with the 2015 STOPP/START criteria using an online survey program (Survey Monkey). The panelists were asked for their opinion on the appropriateness of the STOPP and START criteria, and adaptations to these criteria for older nursing home patients with a limited life expectancy on 4-point Likert scales. Consensus was defined as ≥70% of the panelists answering (very) inappropriate or (very) appropriate, and (completely) disagree or (completely) agree.

Twenty-one panelists completed all 3 Delphi rounds. The final list of "Represcribing for Nursing home residents With A Limited life expectancy (ReNeWAL)" criteria comprises 132 criteria: 98 criteria to stop (70 original STOPP criteria and 28 adapted) and 34 criteria to start (16 original START criteria and 18 adapted) for older nursing home patients with a limited life expectancy. Considerations that panelists mentioned for adapting criteria were mainly prevention and treatment of discomfort.

It is clear that represcribing for older nursing home patients is highly complex and requires the consideration of various elements. The ReNeWAL criteria may be useful in enhancing represcribing for older nursing home patients with a limited life expectancy.

Central nervous system (CNS) medications are linked to higher morbidity and mortality in older adults. Hospitalization allows for deprescribing opportunities. This qualitative study investigates clinician and patient perspectives on CNS medication deprescribing during hospitalization using a behavioral change framework, aiming to inform interventions and identify recommendations to enhance hospital deprescribing processes.

This qualitative study focused on hospitalists, primary care providers, pharmacists, and patients aged ≥60 years hospitalized on a general medicine service and prescribed ≥1 CNS medications. Using semi-structured interviews and focus groups, we aimed to evaluate patient medication knowledge, prior deprescribing experiences, and decision-making preferences, as well as provider processes and tools for medication evaluation and deprescribing. Rapid qualitative analysis applying the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior (COM-B) framework revealed themes influencing deprescribing behavior in patients and providers.

A total of 52 participants (20 patients and 32 providers) identified facilitators and barriers across deprescribing steps and generated recommended strategies to address them. Clinicians and patients highlighted the opportunity for CNS medication deprescribing during hospitalizations, facilitated by multidisciplinary teams enhancing clinicians' capability to make medication changes. Both groups also stressed the importance of intensive patient engagement, education, and monitoring during hospitalizations, acknowledging challenges in timing and extent of deprescribing, with some patients preferring decisions deferred to outpatient clinicians. Hospitalist and pharmacist recommendations centered on early pharmacist involvement for medication reconciliation, expanding pharmacy consultation and clinician education on deprescribing, whereas patients recommended enhancing shared decision-making through patient education on medication adverse effects, tapering plans, and alternatives. Hospitalists and PCPs also emphasized standardized discharge instructions and transitional care calls to improve medication review and feedback during care transitions.

Clinicians and patients highlighted the potential advantages of hospital interventions for CNS medication deprescribing, emphasizing the necessity of addressing communication, education, and coordination challenges between inpatient and outpatient settings.

Seniors with recurrent hospitalizations who are taking multiple medications including high-risk medications are at particular risk for serious adverse medication events. We will assess whether an expert Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (CPT) medication management intervention during hospitalization with follow-up post-discharge and communication with circle of care is feasible and can decrease drug therapy problems amongst this group.

The design is a pragmatic pilot randomized trial with 1:1 patient-level concealed randomization with blinded outcome assessment and data analysis. Participants will be adults 65 years and older admitted to internal medicine services for more than 2 days, who have had at least one other hospitalization in the prior year, taking five or more chronic medications including at least one high-risk medication. The CPT intervention identifies medication targets; completes consult, including priorities for improving prescribing negotiated with the patient; starts the care plan; ensures a detailed discharge medication reconciliation and circle-of-care communication; and sees the patient at least twice after hospital discharge via virtual visits to consolidate the care plan in the community. Control group receives usual care. Primary outcomes are feasibility - recruitment, retention, costs, and clinical - number of drug therapy problems improved, with secondary outcomes examining coordination of transitions in care, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs. Follow-up is to 3-month posthospital discharge.

If results support feasibility of ramp-up and promising clinical outcomes, a follow-up definitive trial will be organized using a developing national platform and medication appropriateness network. Since the intervention allows a very scarce medical specialty expertise to be offered via virtual care, there is potential to improve the safety, outcomes, and cost of care widely.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04077281.

Drug-related problems (DRPs) and potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) are associated with adverse patient and health care outcomes. In the setting of hospitalized older patients, Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSSs) could reduce PIP and therefore improve clinical outcomes. However, prior research showed a low proportion of adherence to CDSS recommendations by clinicians with possible explanatory factors such as little clinical relevance and alert fatigue.

To investigate the use of a CDSS in a real-life setting of hospitalized older patients. We aim to (I) report the natural course and interventions based on the top 20 rule alerts (the 20 most frequently generated alerts per clinical rule) of generated red CDSS alerts (those requiring action) over time from day 1 to 7 of hospitalization; and (II) to explore whether an optimal timing can be defined (in terms of day per rule).

All hospitalized patients aged ≥ 60 years, admitted to Zuyderland Medical Centre (the Netherlands) were included. The evaluation of the CDSS was investigated using a database used for standard care. Our CDSS was run daily and was evaluated on day 1 to 7 of hospitalization. We collected demographic and clinical data, and moreover the total number of CDSS alerts; the total number of top 20 rule alerts; those that resulted in an action by the pharmacist and the course of outcome of the alerts on days 1 to 7 of hospitalization.

In total 3574 unique hospitalized patients, mean age 76.7 (SD 8.3) years and 53% female, were included. From these patients, in total 8073 alerts were generated; with the top 20 of rule alerts we covered roughly 90% of the total. For most rules in the top 20 the highest percentage of resolved alerts lies somewhere between day 4 and 5 of hospitalization, after which there is equalization or a decrease. Although for some rules, there is a gradual increase in resolved alerts until day 7. The level of resolved rule alerts varied between the different clinical rules; varying from > 50-70% (potassium levels, anticoagulation, renal function) to less than 25%.

This study reports the course of the 20 most frequently generated alerts of a CDSS in a setting of hospitalized older patients. We have shown that for most rules, irrespective of an intervention by the pharmacist, the highest percentage of resolved rules is between day 4 and 5 of hospitalization. The difference in level of resolved alerts between the different rules, could point to more or less clinical relevance and advocates further research to explore ways of optimizing CDSSs by adjustment in timing and number of alerts to prevent alert fatigue.

Physicians often face difficulties in selecting appropriate medications for older adults with multiple comorbidities. As people age, they are more likely to be living with a number of chronic conditions (multimorbidity) and be prescribed a high number of medications (polypharmacy). Multimorbidity is frequent in nursing home (NH) residents and the use of potentially inappropriate medications, especially psychotropic drugs, is widespread. This retrospective cross-sectional cohort study examined the frequency of potentially inappropriate psychotropic drugs using the Beers, Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) and Fit fOR The Aged (FORTA) criteria, and their association with mortality.

This retrospective cross-sectional cohort study was conducted on a sample of long-term care NHs across Italy. Of the 34 NHs with an electronic medical records system, 27 met the inclusion criteria, with complete web-based case report forms (CRFs). Residents under the age of 65 years were excluded. We calculated the prevalence of potentially inappropriate psychotropics drugs (antipsychotics, antidepressants and anxiolytics/hypnotics) according to three criteria for prescriptive appropriateness. Univariate and multivariate correlations were examined, taking into account age, sex, comorbidities, and the number of psychotropic drugs, to analyse the relationship between inappropriate psychotropic use and mortality rates. The rate of inappropriate psychotropic prescriptions was calculated with the prevalence of residents receiving potentially inappropriate psychotropic drugs according to the three criteria. We used a logistic model to check for a possible predictive relationship between inappropriate use of psychotropics and mortality. The study evaluated differences in prescriptive appropriateness among NHs by analysing the proportions of potentially inappropriately treated residents at the last visit. Differences were compared with the overall sample mean using confidence intervals (CIs) calculated using Wald's method.

This study involved 2555 residents, of whom 1908 (74.7% of the total) were treated with psychotropic drugs; 186 (7.3% of the total) were exposed to at least one psychotropic drug considered potentially inappropriate according to the FORTA criteria. Analysis using the Beers criteria showed that 1616 residents (63.2% of the total) received at least one psychotropic drug considered potentially inappropriate. In line with the Beers recommendation, patients receiving at least three psychotropic drugs were also included and 440 were identified (17.2% of the total sample). According to the STOPP criteria, 1451 residents (56.8% of the total sample) were prescribed potentially inappropriate psychotropic drugs. No correlation was found between potentially inappropriate use of psychotropic drugs and mortality, in either univariate analysis or in a multivariate model adjusted for age, sex and comorbidity index.

Different criteria for appropriate drug prescription identify very different percentages of patients in NHs exposed to psychotropics considered potentially inappropriate. The Beers and STOPP/START criteria identified a larger percentage of patients exposed in NHs than FORTA.

This study aimed to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) and their association with ADR-related hospital admissions in patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted acutely to the hospital.

Information on medications and morbidities was extracted from the Adverse Drug Reactions in an Ageing Population (ADAPT) cohort (N = 798: N = 361 ADR-related admissions; 437 non-ADR-related admissions). PIP and PPOs were assessed using Beers Criteria 2019 and STOPP/START version 2. Multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratios (aOR), 95%CI) was used to examine the association between PIP, PPOs and ADR-related admissions, adjusting for covariates (age, gender, comorbidity, polypharmacy).

In total, 715 (90%; 95% CI 87-92%) patients had ≥1 Beers Criteria, 555 (70%; 95% CI 66-73%) had ≥ 1 STOPP criteria and 666 patients (83%; 95% CI 81-86%) had ≥ 1 START criteria. Being prescribed at least one Beers (aOR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.00-2.77), or meeting STOPP (aOR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.79-1.45) or START (aOR = 0.72; 95%CI = 0.50-1.06) criteria or the number of PIP/PPO criteria met was not significantly associated with ADR-related admissions. Patients prescribed certain drug classes (e.g., antiplatelet agents, diuretics) per individual PIP criteria were more likely to have an ADR-related admission.

There was a high prevalence of PIP and PPOs in this cohort but no association with ADR-related admissions.

The rising prevalence of comorbidities in an increasingly aging population has sparked a reciprocal rise in polypharmacy. Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a greater burden of polypharmacy due to the comorbidities and complications associated with their disease. Polypharmacy in CKD patients has been linked to myriad direct and indirect costs for patients and the society at large. Pharmacists are uniquely positioned within the healthcare team to streamline polypharmacy management in the setting of CKD. In this article, we review the landscape of polypharmacy and examine its impacts through the lens of the ECHO model of Economic, Clinical, and Humanistic Outcomes. We also present strategies for healthcare teams to improve polypharmacy care through comprehensive medication management process that includes medication reconciliation during transitions of care, medication therapy management, and deprescribing. These pharmacist-led interventions have the potential to mitigate adverse outcomes associated with polypharmacy in CKD.

The prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), including NSAIDs, first-generation antihistamines, tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), and benzodiazepines among elderly inpatients in Thailand, based on the 2019 Beers criteria, is insufficiently investigated.

This study retrospectively examined 300 elderly patients in a Thai tertiary hospital, assessing four PIM classes based on the 2019 Beers criteria and exploring factors and variations in PIM prescription patterns across different phases of hospitalisation.

The study found an overall PIM prescription rate of 28%, consisting of: benzodiazepines (14%), first-generation antihistamines (9%), NSAIDs (3%), and TCAs (2%). Patients taking at least 5 medications prior to admission were more likely to receive PIMs (OR 3.77, 95% CI 1.15-12.35). Furthermore, PIM prescription was significantly associated with age, showing a 4.8% yearly increase (p = 0.01), and the number of comorbidities increased by 16.2% per unit (p = 0.021). Additionally, PIM use during admission was significantly linked to a longer hospital stay (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.50-7.33).

These findings emphasise the need for continued monitoring and optimisation of medication management, and collaboration between pharmacists and physicians to review and adjust prescriptions, especially in elderly inpatients experiencing polypharmacy and multiple comorbidities.

Certain combinations of medications can be harmful and may lead to serious adverse drug events (ADEs). Identifying potentially problematic medication clusters could help guide prescribing and/or deprescribing decisions in hospital. The aim of this study is to characterize medication prescribing patterns at hospital discharge and determine which medication clusters were associated with an increased risk of ADEs in the 30-day posthospital discharge.

All residents of the province of Ontario in Canada aged 66 years or older admitted to hospital between March 2016 and February 2017 were included. Identification of medication clusters prescribed at hospital discharge was conducted using latent class analysis. Cluster identification and categorization were based on medications dispensed up to 30-day posthospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the potential association between membership to a particular medication cluster and ADEs postdischarge, while also evaluating other patient characteristics.

In total, 188 354 patients were included in the study cohort. Median age (interquartile range) was 77 (71-84) years, and patients had a median (IQR) (interquartile range [IQR]) of 9 (6-13) medications dispensed prior to admission. Within the study population, 6 separate clusters of dispensing patterns were identified: cardiovascular (14%), respiratory (26%), complex care needs (12%), cardiovascular and metabolic (15%), infection (10%), and surgical (24%). Overall, 12 680 (7%) patients had an ADE in the 30 days following discharge. After considering other patient characteristics, those belonging to the respiratory cluster had the highest risk of ADEs (adjusted odds ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.17) compared with all the other clusters, while those in the complex care needs cluster had the lowest risk (adjusted odds ratio: 0.82, 95% confidence interval: 0.77-0.87).

This study suggests that ADEs post hospital discharge can be linked with identifiable medication clusters. This information may help clinicians and researchers better understand patient populations that are more or less likely to benefit from peri-hospital discharge interventions aimed at reducing ADEs.

Like most organs, the renal system decreases in function as we age. In the elderly, chronic kidney disease is common. When patients with chronic kidney disease take nephrotoxic medications, they are more likely to suffer adverse drug reactions, be hospitalized, and spend an extended period in the hospital. Calculating the renal clearance of a drug dose based on its glomerular filtration rate, or creatinine clearance, is necessary. Multiple tools are available for identifying renally inappropriate medications (RIMs). RIM prescriptions can be influenced by various factors, which vary according to the study. A higher number of medications means a higher likelihood of using RIMs. Numerous studies have investigated RIMs. The most contraindicated drug in renal insufficiency patients was a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication. A variety of interventions have been used to reduce RIM prescriptions to varying degrees of success.

Deprescribing reduces polypharmacy in older adults. A thorough study of the effect of deprescribing interventions on clinical outcomes in older adults is presently lacking. As a result, we evaluated the impact of deprescribing on clinical outcomes in older patients.

Meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from the time of creation to March 2023.

Randomized controlled trial with participants at least 60 years old.

Mortality, falls (number of fallers), hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, medication adherence, HRQoL (health-regulated quality of life), incidence of ADR (adverse drug reactions), PIM (potentially inappropriate medication), and PPO (potentially prescription omission) were evaluated in the meta-analysis.

A total of 32 RCTs (18,670 patients) were included. Deprescribing interventions significantly reduced proportions of older adults with PIM, PPO, and the incidence of ADRs. The interventions group also improved medication compliance.

Compared to routine care, deprescribing interventions significantly improve clinical outcome indicators for older adults.

Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, so that many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients. This is the third update of this Cochrane Review.

To assess the effects of interventions, alone or in combination, in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people.

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and two trials registers up until 13 January 2021, together with handsearching of reference lists to identify additional studies. We ran updated searches in February 2023 and have added potentially eligible studies to 'Characteristics of studies awaiting classification'.

For this update, we included randomised trials only. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy (four or more medicines) in people aged 65 years and older, which used a validated tool to assess prescribing appropriateness. These tools can be classified as either implicit tools (judgement-based/based on expert professional judgement) or explicit tools (criterion-based, comprising lists of drugs to be avoided in older people).

Four review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, and two authors extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We pooled study-specific estimates, and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

We identified 38 studies, which includes an additional 10 in this update. The included studies consisted of 24 randomised trials and 14 cluster-randomised trials. Thirty-six studies examined complex, multi-faceted interventions of pharmaceutical care (i.e. the responsible provision of medicines to improve patients' outcomes), in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals such as general physicians, pharmacists, nurses and geriatricians, and most were conducted in high-income countries. Assessments using the Cochrane risk of bias tool found that there was a high and/or unclear risk of bias across a number of domains. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall certainty of evidence for each pooled outcome ranged from low to very low. It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care improves medication appropriateness (as measured by an implicit tool) (mean difference (MD) -5.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -9.26 to -2.06; I2 = 97%; 8 studies, 947 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.05; I2 = 67%; 9 studies, 2404 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PIM (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98; I2 = 84%; 13 studies, 4534 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may slightly reduce the number of potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) (SMD -0.48, 95% CI -1.05 to 0.09; I2 = 92%; 3 studies, 691 participants; low-certainty evidence), however it must be noted that this effect estimate is based on only three studies, which had serious limitations in terms of risk of bias. Likewise, it is uncertain whether pharmaceutical care reduces the proportion of patients with one or more PPO (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.91; I2 = 95%; 7 studies, 2765 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference to hospital admissions (data not pooled; 14 studies, 4797 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pharmaceutical care may make little or no difference to quality of life (data not pooled; 16 studies, 7458 participants; low-certainty evidence). Medication-related problems were reported in 10 studies (6740 participants) using different terms (e.g. adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions). No consistent intervention effect on medication-related problems was noted across studies. This also applied to studies examining adherence to medication (nine studies, 3848 participants).

It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy resulted in clinically significant improvement. Since the last update of this review in 2018, there appears to have been an increase in the number of studies seeking to address potential prescribing omissions and more interventions being delivered by multidisciplinary teams.

Elderly patients are often polymedicated, and drug-related hospitalizations are common in this population. In our hospital, pharmacists from the mobile geriatric team (MGT) coordinate medication reviews (MR) for elderly patients hospitalized in non-geriatric wards, to prevent iatrogenic.

The aim of this work is to determine whether the drug-related origin of hospitalizations can be considered as a targeting criterion for performing MRs.

We conducted a retrospective study of data from patients who received a MGT's MR between March 2021 and December 2022, from a single center of more than 1000 beds. The drug-related origin of the hospitalization was estimated as probable or unlikely by the AT-HARM10 tool. Between the two groups, we compared the number of potentially inappropriate prescriptions detected by the PIM-check and START/STOPP tools, drug-drug interactions (DI), unintended discrepancies (UDI) at entry reconciliation, the drug burden index (DBI), and the number of drug-related problems (DRP) i.e., START/STOPP score + DI + UDI. Linear regression of the number of DRP by AT-HARM10 score was computed.

110 patients were included. 56 hospitalizations were estimated MRH and 54 non-MRH. Mean age (85.1 ± 7.0), ADL (3.8 ± 1.9), IADL (2.0 ± 1.6), and number of medications at entry (8.9 ± 3.8) were comparable in the 2 groups. Compared with non-MRH group, MRH group had a higher number of START/STOPP criteria (5.7 ± 3.5 vs 3.0 ± 2.6; p < 0.05), PIM-check overuses (2.1 ± 1.7 vs 1.4 ± 1.4; p < 0.05), DI (8.4 ± 9.0 vs 4.7 ± 4.7; p < 0.05), UDI at entry (4.0 ± 3.34 vs 2.2 ± 2.1; p < 0.05), and higher DBI score (0.9 ± 0.7 vs 0.3 ± 0.4; p < 0.05). The number of DRP was higher in group P (17.6 ± 10.8 vs 9.8 ± 6.3; p < 0.00.5). Linear regression showed a positive correlation between AT-HARM10 score and the number of DRP (r = 0.5, p < 0.05) with a coefficient of 7.7 (CI95% = [4.3; 11.1]) and an intercept of 9.8.

These results allow us to consider AT-HARM10 score as a targeting criterion for performing MR for elderly patients, as part of a curative approach to drug iatrogenic for these patients.

Low-value care is healthcare leading to no or little clinical benefit for the patient. The best (combinations of) interventions to reduce low-value care are unclear.

To provide an overview of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating deimplementation strategies, to quantify the effectiveness and describe different combinations of strategies.

Analysis of 121 RCTs (1990-2019) evaluating a strategy to reduce low-value care, identified by a systematic review. Deimplementation strategies were described and associations between strategy characteristics and effectiveness explored.

Of 109 trials comparing deimplementation to usual care, 75 (69%) reported a significant reduction of low-value healthcare practices. Seventy-three trials included in a quantitative analysis showed a median relative reduction of 17% (IQR 7%-42%). The effectiveness of deimplementation strategies was not associated with the number and types of interventions applied.

Most deimplementation strategies achieved a considerable reduction of low-value care. We found no signs that a particular type or number of interventions works best for deimplementation. Future deimplementation studies should map relevant contextual factors, such as the workplace culture or economic factors. Interventions should be tailored to these factors and provide details regarding sustainability of the effect.

Living with multiple long-term health conditions (multimorbidity) is increasingly common in older age. The more long-term conditions that an individual has, the more medicines they are likely to take. Hospitalisation as a consequence of medication-related harm is increasing and a concerted effort is needed to reduce the burden of harm caused by medication. However, making decisions about the balance between benefit and harm for an older person with multimorbidity and polypharmacy is very complex. There are various clinical tools that can help to identify patients at higher risk of harm and numerous strategies, including medicines optimisation reviews that incorporate personalised health information, to try to reduce risk. Further education and training of the healthcare professionals is needed to equip the multidisciplinary workforce with the skills and knowledge to address these challenges. This article discusses some of the changes that can be implemented now and highlights areas that will require more research before they can be introduced, in order to help patients to get the best out of their medicines.

Polypharmacy is very common in older cancer patients and these patients are particularly vulnerable to drug-drug interactions and adverse drug reactions because they often receive chemotherapy and symptom-relieving agents.

The primary aim of the randomized, controlled Optimization of Polypharmacy in Geriatric Oncology (OPTIMAL) trial is to test whether an advisory letter with the results of a comprehensive medication review conducted with the Fit fOR The Aged (FORTA) list to the caring physician in rehabilitation clinics improves the quality of life (QoL) of older cancer patients exposed to polypharmacy more than usual care. The FORTA list detects medication overuse, underuse, and potentially inappropriate drug use among older adults. In the oncology departments of approximately 10 German rehabilitation clinics, we aim to recruit 514 cancer patients (22 common cancers; diagnosis or recurrence requiring treatment in the last 5 years; all stages) who are ≥ 65 years old, regularly take ≥ 5 drugs, and have ≥ 1 medication-related problem. All necessary information about the patients will be provided to a pharmacist at the coordinating center (German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg), who will perform randomization (1:1) and conduct the medication review with the FORTA list. For the intervention group only, the results are sent by letter to the treating physician in the rehabilitation clinics, who shall discuss medication changes with the patient at the discharge visit, as well as implement them afterwards and disclose them in the discharge letter to the general practitioner. The control group gets the usual care provided in German rehabilitation clinics, which usually does not include a comprehensive medication review but can include medication changes. Patients will be blinded, as they cannot know whether proposed medication changes were part of the study or part of usual care. Study physicians cannot be blinded. The primary endpoint will be the EORTC-QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL score, assessed via self-administered questionnaires 8 months after baseline.

If the planned study shows that a medication review with the FORTA list improves the QoL of older cancer patients in oncological rehabilitation more than usual care, it would provide the necessary evidence to translate the trial's findings into routine care.

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS): DRKS00031024.

Precision medicine is an approach to maximise the effectiveness of disease treatment and prevention and minimise harm from medications by considering relevant demographic, clinical, genomic and environmental factors in making treatment decisions. Precision medicine is complex, even for decisions about single drugs for single diseases, as it requires expert consideration of multiple measurable factors that affect pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and many patient-specific variables. Given the increasing number of patients with multiple conditions and medications, there is a need to apply lessons learned from precision medicine in monotherapy and single disease management to optimise polypharmacy. However, precision medicine for optimisation of polypharmacy is particularly challenging because of the vast number of interacting factors that influence drug use and response. In this narrative review, we aim to provide and apply the latest research findings to achieve precision medicine in the context of polypharmacy. Specifically, this review aims to (1) summarise challenges in achieving precision medicine specific to polypharmacy; (2) synthesise the current approaches to precision medicine in polypharmacy; (3) provide a summary of the literature in the field of prediction of unknown drug-drug interactions (DDI) and (4) propose a novel approach to provide precision medicine for patients with polypharmacy. For our proposed model to be implemented in routine clinical practice, a comprehensive intervention bundle needs to be integrated into the electronic medical record using bioinformatic approaches on a wide range of data to predict the effects of polypharmacy regimens on an individual. In addition, clinicians need to be trained to interpret the results of data from sources including pharmacogenomic testing, DDI prediction and physiological-pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling to inform their medication reviews. Future studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this model and to test generalisability so that it can be implemented at scale, aiming to improve outcomes in people with polypharmacy.

To assess the prevalence and potential risk factors for polypharmacy and prescribing of the potentially inappropriate medications, opioids and benzodiazepines/Z-drugs, in older adults with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

The study population comprised adults age ≥50 years meeting American College of Rheumatology or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics classification criteria followed at a tertiary care rheumatology clinic. Information on prescriptions filled in the 4 months preceding chart review was obtained from the Manitoba Drug Program Information Network. Clinical data, including age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 score, prednisone use, SLE duration, and rural residence were abstracted from electronic medical records. Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess any association between polypharmacy (using 2 definitions: ≥5 and ≥10 medications), potentially inappropriate medication use, and clinical features.

A total of 206 patients (mean age 62 years, 91% female, 36% rural) were included: 148 (72%) filled ≥5 medications, 71 (35%) filled ≥10 medications, 63 (31%) used benzodiazepines/Z-drugs, and 50 (24%) used opioids. Among the 77 patients age ≥65 years, 57 (74%) filled ≥5 medications, and 26 (34%) filled ≥10 medications, compared to 30% and 4%, respectively, of Manitobans age ≥65 years (National Prescription Drug Utilization Information System, 2016). The odds of polypharmacy were greater with prednisone use (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.70 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.40-9.79] for ≥5 medications), CCI score (adjusted OR 1.62 [95% CI 1.20-2.17]), and rural residence (adjusted OR 2.05 [95% CI 1.01-4.18]). Odds of benzodiazepine/Z-drug use were increased with polypharmacy (adjusted OR 4.35 [95% CI 1.69-11.22]), and odds of opioid use were increased with polypharmacy (adjusted OR 6.75 [95% CI 1.93-23.69]) and CCI score (adjusted OR 1.29 [95% CI 1.08-1.54]).

The prevalence of polypharmacy in this SLE cohort was higher than in the general Manitoban population. Polypharmacy is a strong marker for use of prescription benzodiazepines/Z-drugs and opioids.

A medication review can be defined as a structured evaluation of a patient's medication conducted by healthcare professionals with the aim of optimising medication use and improving health outcomes. Optimising medication therapy though medication reviews may benefit hospitalised patients.

We examined the effects of medication review interventions in hospitalised adult patients compared to standard care or to other types of medication reviews on all-cause mortality, hospital readmissions, emergency department contacts and health-related quality of life.

In this Cochrane Review update, we searched for new published and unpublished trials using the following electronic databases from 1 January 2014 to 17 January 2022 without language restrictions: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). To identify additional trials, we searched the reference lists of included trials and other publications by lead trial authors, and contacted experts.

We included randomised trials of medication reviews delivered by healthcare professionals for hospitalised adult patients. We excluded trials including outpatients and paediatric patients.

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for data clarification and relevant unpublished data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous data (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the overall certainty of the evidence.

In this updated review, we included a total of 25 trials (15,076 participants), of which 15 were new trials (11,501 participants). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 20 months. We found that medication reviews in hospitalised adults may have little to no effect on mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05; 18 trials, 10,108 participants; low-certainty evidence); likely reduce hospital readmissions (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 17 trials, 9561 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may reduce emergency department contacts (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.03; 8 trials, 3527 participants; low-certainty evidence) and have very uncertain effects on health-related quality of life (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.30; 4 trials, 392 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

Medication reviews in hospitalised adult patients likely reduce hospital readmissions and may reduce emergency department contacts. The evidence suggests that mediation reviews may have little to no effect on mortality, while the effect on health-related quality of life is very uncertain. Almost all trials included elderly polypharmacy patients, which limits the generalisability of the results beyond this population.

Older adults are among the most vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 epidemic, contributing to a large proportion of COVID-19-related death. Medication review and reconciliation by pharmacist can help reduce the number of potentially inappropriate medications but these services were halted during COVID-19.

To assess the prevalence and factors associated with inappropriate medicine use among older populations with COVID-19.

This was a cross-sectional, retrospective analysis of medications among hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. Potentially inappropriate medication use was categorized using the Beer's and STOPP criteria.

Combining both criteria, 181 (32.7%) of the 553 patients were identified to have used at least one or more potentially inappropriate medication. A marginally higher number of inappropriate medications was documented using the Beers 2019 criteria (151 PIM in 124 patients) compared to STOPP criteria (133 PIMS in 104 patients). The long-term use of proton pump inhibitors (n = 68; 12.3%) and drugs which increases the risk of postural hypotension were the most commonly reported PIM (n = 41; 7.4%). Potentially inappropriate medication use was associated with previous history of hospital admission in the past 12 months (Odds ratio [OR]: 2.27; 95% CI 1.29-3.99) and higher number of discharge medications.

Nearly, one in three older adults with COVID-19 had been prescribed a PIM, and the proportion of older adults with polypharmacy increased after discharge. This highlights the importance of having clinical pharmacist conducting medication reviews to identify PIMs and ensure medication appropriateness.

Optimal medication management is important during hospitalization and at discharge because post-discharge adverse drug events (ADEs) are common, often preventable, and contribute to patient harms, healthcare utilization, and costs. Conduct a cost analysis of a comprehensive pharmacist-led transitions-of-care medication management intervention for older adults during and after hospital discharge. Twelve intervention components addressed medication reconciliation, medication review, and medication adherence. Trained, experienced pharmacists delivered the intervention to older adults with chronic comorbidities at 2 large U.S. academic centers. To quantify and categorize time spent on the intervention, we conducted a time-and-motion analysis of study pharmacists over 36 sequential workdays (14 519 min) involving 117 patients. For 40 patients' hospitalizations, we observed all intervention activities. We used the median minutes spent and pharmacist wages nationally to calculate cost per hospitalization (2020 U.S. dollars) from the hospital perspective, relative to usual care. Pharmacists spent a median of 66.9 min per hospitalization (interquartile range 46.1-90.1), equating to $101 ($86 to $116 in sensitivity analyses). In unadjusted analyses, study site was associated with time spent (medians 111 and 51.8 min) while patient primary language, discharge disposition, number of outpatient medications, and patient age were not. In this cost analysis, comprehensive medication management around discharge cost about $101 per hospitalization, with variation across sites. This cost is at least an order of magnitude less than published costs associated with ADEs, hospital readmissions, or other interventions designed to reduce readmissions. Work is ongoing to assess the current intervention's effectiveness.

Cardiovascular agents commonly used in geriatric patients, are linked to potentially avoidable harm and might hence be a suitable substrate for medication review practices. Therefore, we sought to update and validate the content of the cardiovascular segment of the previously published Rationalization of Home Medication by an Adjusted STOPP list in Older Patients (RASP) List.

A three-step study was conducted by the pharmacy department in collaboration with the geriatric medicine and cardiology department at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. First, the cardiovascular segment of the RASP list version 2014 was updated taking into account published research, other screening tools and the input of end-users. Secondly, this draft was reviewed during three panel discussions with five expert cardiologists and three clinical pharmacists, all of whom had relevant expertise in geriatric pharmacotherapy. Thirdly, the content was validated using a modified Delphi Technique by a panel of European hospital pharmacists, cardiologists, geriatricians and an internal medicine physician.

After the first and second step, the RASP_CARDIO list comprised 94 statements. Consensus (≥ 80% agreement) of all statements and one new statement about gliflozins in heart failure was achieved by a panel of seventeen experts across four European countries after two validation rounds. The final construct comprised a list of 95 statements related to potentially inappropriate prescribing of cardiovascular agents.

The RASP_CARDIO list is an updated and validated explicit screening tool to optimize cardiovascular pharmacotherapy in geriatric patients.

Patients with hip fracture are at high risk of medication errors due to a combination of high age, comorbidities, polypharmacy and several care transitions after fracture. The aim was to study medication management tasks concerning patient safety: medication reconciliation, medication review and communication of key medication information in care transitions.

Descriptive study comprising a self-administered clinician survey (MedHipPro-Q) and a retrospective review of hospital medical records of patients with hip fracture.

Regional hospital and the associated primary care units (South-Eastern Norway).

The survey received responses from 253 clinicians, 61 medical doctors and 192 nurses, involved in the medication management of patients with hip fracture, from acute admittance to the regional hospital, through an in-hospital fast track, primary care rehabilitation and back to permanent residence. Respondents' representativeness was unknown, introducing a risk of selection and non-response bias, and extrapolating findings should be done with caution. The patient records review included a random sample of records of patients with hip fracture (n=50).

Medication reconciliation, medication review and communication of medication information from two perspectives: the clinicians' (ie, experiences with medication management) and the practice (ie, documentation of completed medication management).

In the survey, most clinicians stated they performed medication reconciliation (79%) and experienced that patients often arrived without a medication list after care transition (37%). Doctors agreed that more patients would benefit from medication reviews (86%). In the hospital patient records, completed medication reconciliation was documented in most patients (76%). Medication review was documented in 2 of 50 patients (4%). Discharge summary guidelines were followed fully for 3 of 50 patients (6%).

Our study revealed a need for improved medication management for patients with hip fracture. Patients were at risk of medication information not being transferred correctly between care settings, and medication reviews seemed to be underused in clinical practice.

To describe the distribution of costs based on potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and adverse drug reaction (ADR) status in terms of total direct costs and costs caused by ADRs, among older adults.

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among older adults, identified from a random sample of the general Swedish population. PIP was identified based on the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria and ADRs were identified using the Howard criteria. Causality between PIP and ADRs was evaluated using Hallas' criteria. Prevalence-based direct healthcare costs were calculated for the 3-month study period, including the total cost for healthcare and drugs, and the cost caused by ADRs.

All care levels, including primary care, other outpatient care and inpatient care.

813 adults ≥65 years.

The prevalence and cost of PIP and ADRs.

Total direct cost for persons with PIP was approximately twice the total cost of those without PIP (€1958 (€1428-€2616) vs €881 (€817-€1167), p=0.0020). The costs caused by ADRs was 10 times higher among persons with PIP, compared with those without PIP (€270 (€86-€545) vs €27 (€10-€61), p=0.047). For persons with ADRs caused by PIP, total direct costs were €4646 (€2617-€7931). This group represented 8% of the study population and used 25% of the costs. The main cost driver in all studied patient groups was healthcare contacts.

Older persons with PIP and ADRs had high healthcare costs, particularly when ADRs were caused by PIP. Since these costs appear to be substantial, the potential savings by preventing their occurrence may, to a certain degree, cover the added cost of such activities. Further studies should be undertaken to provide further evidence on the costs of PIP, ADRs and ADRs caused by PIP.

Digital innovations are yet to make real impacts in the care home sector despite the considerable potential of digital health approaches to help with continued staff shortages and to improve quality of care. To understand the current landscape of digital innovation in long-term care facilities such as nursing and care homes, it is important to find out which clinical decision support tools are currently used in long-term care facilities, what their purpose is, how they were developed, and what types of data they use.

The aim of this review was to analyze studies that evaluated clinical decision support tools in long-term care facilities based on the purpose and intended users of the tools, the evidence base used to develop the tools, how the tools are used and their effectiveness, and the types of data the tools use to contribute to the existing scientific evidence to inform a roadmap for digital innovation, specifically for clinical decision support tools, in long-term care facilities.

A review of the literature published between January 1, 2010, and July 21, 2021, was conducted, using key search terms in 3 scientific journal databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and the British Nursing Index. Only studies evaluating clinical decision support tools in long-term care facilities were included in the review.

In total, 17 papers were included in the final review. The clinical decision support tools described in these papers were evaluated for medication management, pressure ulcer prevention, dementia management, falls prevention, hospitalization, malnutrition prevention, urinary tract infection, and COVID-19 infection. In general, the included studies show that decision support tools can show improvements in delivery of care and in health outcomes.

Although the studies demonstrate the potential of positive impact of clinical decision support tools, there is variability in results, in part because of the diversity of types of decision support tools, users, and contexts as well as limited validation of the tools in use and in part because of the lack of clarity in defining the whole intervention.

our aim was to assess the effectiveness of medication review and deprescribing interventions as a single intervention in falls prevention.

systematic review and meta-analysis.

Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO until 28 March 2022.

randomised controlled trials of older participants comparing any medication review or deprescribing intervention with usual care and reporting falls as an outcome.

title/abstract and full-text screening by two reviewers.

Cochrane Collaboration revised tool.

results reported separately for different settings and sufficiently comparable studies meta-analysed.

forty-nine heterogeneous studies were included.

meta-analyses of medication reviews resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.29, I2 = 0%, 3 studies(s)) for number of fallers, in an RR = 0.95 (0.70-1.27, I2 = 37%, 3 s) for number of injurious fallers and in a rate ratio (RaR) of 0.89 (0.69-1.14, I2 = 0%, 2 s) for injurious falls.

meta-analyses assessing medication reviews resulted in an RR = 0.97 (0.74-1.28, I2 = 15%, 2 s) and in an RR = 0.50 (0.07-3.50, I2 = 72% %, 2 s) for number of fallers after and during admission, respectively.

meta-analyses investigating medication reviews or deprescribing plans resulted in an RR = 0.86 (0.72-1.02, I2 = 0%, 5 s) for number of fallers and in an RaR = 0.93 (0.64-1.35, I2 = 92%, 7 s) for number of falls.

the heterogeneity of the interventions precluded us to estimate the exact effect of medication review and deprescribing as a single intervention. For future studies, more comparability is warranted. These interventions should not be implemented as a stand-alone strategy in falls prevention but included in multimodal strategies due to the multifactorial nature of falls.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020218231.