Multidisciplinary care of older adults in the emergency department to influence deprescribing in older adults: a cohort study

IF 1 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Pub Date : 2023-12-18 DOI:10.1002/jppr.1896
Christopher Reilly BPharm, Elizabeth Buikstra PhD, Edward Strivens MBBS, BSci, Elizabeth Marsden MBBS, PhD, Jarred Brose BNurs, Alison Craswell BNurs, PhD
{"title":"Multidisciplinary care of older adults in the emergency department to influence deprescribing in older adults: a cohort study","authors":"Christopher Reilly BPharm,&nbsp;Elizabeth Buikstra PhD,&nbsp;Edward Strivens MBBS, BSci,&nbsp;Elizabeth Marsden MBBS, PhD,&nbsp;Jarred Brose BNurs,&nbsp;Alison Craswell BNurs, PhD","doi":"10.1002/jppr.1896","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Inappropriate polypharmacy in older adults is a major health problem associated with poor clinical and health service outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a geriatric pharmacist service in the emergency department (ED) identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Between 1 June 2018–31 May 2019, adults ≥70 years of age presenting to ED were reviewed by the Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention (GEDI) pharmacist. The intervention consisted of pharmacist-led medication review using Screening Tool of Older Person’s Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START) criteria, patient education on recommendations, an updated medication list, and a letter sent to their general practitioner (GP) electronically. For eligible consenting older adults, telephone calls were made at least 28 days post-discharge to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. A survey with GPs after 6 months determined how recommendations were perceived. Ethics approval was granted by the Metro North Health B Human Research Ethics Committee (reference no: HREC/18QCH/69–1245) and research governance approval was granted by the study site (Cairns Hinterland Hospital and Health Service, reference no: SSA/Q12345/40673). Informed consent was obtained from all participants via a project information sheet and either the completion of a written consent form (patient participants), verbal consent before interview (GP participants), or implied consent via email responses (GP participants). Routinely collected health data obtained for this study were de-identified and data included in the follow-up study was de-identified.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The GEDI pharmacist reviewed 1214 older adults with an average age of 81 years. The median number of prescribed medications was 10 and 36.8% of older adults had STOPP recommendations. When contacted (<i>n</i> = 35), of those enrolled in the follow-up study, 71% had stated their medications changed, 40% reported all STOPP medications had ceased, and 69% had START medications commenced, suggesting the recommendations provided were clinically appropriate and readily accepted by their GPs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Integration of a geriatric pharmacist demonstrated ample opportunities to address PIP in targeted older adults presenting to ED. This study shows that the pharmacist was able to promote appropriate prescribing through patient education and recommendations communicated to the GP on discharge.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jppr.1896","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jppr.1896","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Inappropriate polypharmacy in older adults is a major health problem associated with poor clinical and health service outcomes.

Aim

We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a geriatric pharmacist service in the emergency department (ED) identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP).

Method

Between 1 June 2018–31 May 2019, adults ≥70 years of age presenting to ED were reviewed by the Geriatric Emergency Department Intervention (GEDI) pharmacist. The intervention consisted of pharmacist-led medication review using Screening Tool of Older Person’s Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START) criteria, patient education on recommendations, an updated medication list, and a letter sent to their general practitioner (GP) electronically. For eligible consenting older adults, telephone calls were made at least 28 days post-discharge to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. A survey with GPs after 6 months determined how recommendations were perceived. Ethics approval was granted by the Metro North Health B Human Research Ethics Committee (reference no: HREC/18QCH/69–1245) and research governance approval was granted by the study site (Cairns Hinterland Hospital and Health Service, reference no: SSA/Q12345/40673). Informed consent was obtained from all participants via a project information sheet and either the completion of a written consent form (patient participants), verbal consent before interview (GP participants), or implied consent via email responses (GP participants). Routinely collected health data obtained for this study were de-identified and data included in the follow-up study was de-identified.

Results

The GEDI pharmacist reviewed 1214 older adults with an average age of 81 years. The median number of prescribed medications was 10 and 36.8% of older adults had STOPP recommendations. When contacted (n = 35), of those enrolled in the follow-up study, 71% had stated their medications changed, 40% reported all STOPP medications had ceased, and 69% had START medications commenced, suggesting the recommendations provided were clinically appropriate and readily accepted by their GPs.

Conclusion

Integration of a geriatric pharmacist demonstrated ample opportunities to address PIP in targeted older adults presenting to ED. This study shows that the pharmacist was able to promote appropriate prescribing through patient education and recommendations communicated to the GP on discharge.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在急诊科为老年人提供多学科护理以影响老年人的去处方化:一项队列研究
老年人不当使用多种药物是一个主要的健康问题,与不良的临床和医疗服务结果有关。我们旨在评估急诊科(ED)老年药剂师服务识别潜在不当处方(PIP)的有效性。2018 年 6 月 1 日至 2019 年 5 月 31 日期间,老年急诊科干预(GEDI)药剂师对急诊科就诊的年龄≥70 岁的成年人进行了审查。干预措施包括由药剂师根据老年人处方筛查工具(STOPP)和提醒医生正确治疗筛查工具(START)标准进行药物审查,对患者进行建议教育,更新药物清单,并以电子方式致函全科医生(GP)。对于符合条件并同意接受干预的老年人,在出院后至少 28 天进行电话回访,以评估干预的效果。6 个月后对全科医生进行调查,了解他们对建议的看法。该研究获得了大都会北部卫生局人类研究伦理委员会的伦理批准(参考编号:HREC/18QCH/69-1245),并获得了研究地点(凯恩斯腹地医院和卫生服务机构,参考编号:SSA/Q12345/40673)的研究管理批准。所有参与者均通过项目信息表和填写书面同意书(患者参与者)、访谈前口头同意(全科医生参与者)或通过电子邮件回复暗示同意(全科医生参与者)获得知情同意。GEDI 药剂师对 1214 名平均年龄为 81 岁的老年人进行了审查。处方药的中位数为 10 种,36.8% 的老年人有 STOPP 建议。当与他们取得联系时(n = 35),在参加随访研究的人中,71% 的人表示他们的用药有所改变,40% 的人报告说所有 STOPP 药物都已停止使用,69% 的人开始使用 START 药物,这表明所提供的建议在临床上是适当的,并且很容易被他们的全科医生接受。这项研究表明,药剂师能够通过对患者的教育以及在出院时向全科医生传达建议来促进适当的处方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research
Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Health Professions-Pharmacy
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
9.50%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: The purpose of this document is to describe the structure, function and operations of the Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research, the official journal of the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia (SHPA). It is owned, published by and copyrighted to SHPA. However, the Journal is to some extent unique within SHPA in that it ‘…has complete editorial freedom in terms of content and is not under the direction of the Society or its Council in such matters…’. This statement, originally based on a Role Statement for the Editor-in-Chief 1993, is also based on the definition of ‘editorial independence’ from the World Association of Medical Editors and adopted by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Person- and carer-centred palliative care: consensus for the pharmacy profession Standard of practice in women's and newborn health for pharmacy services Stability of flucytosine 100 mg/mL suspension as an alternative to intravenous administration Rise in paracetamol therapeutic errors in the community during the COVID‐19 pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1