Senior Care Pharmacist最新文献

Background National guidelines no longer recommend adults 60 years of age and older to begin treatment with low-dose daily aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) due to a lack of proven net benefit and a higher risk of bleeding. Objective The objective of this cross-sectional retrospective analysis was to evaluate the appropriateness of low-dose aspirin prescribing and subsequent gastrointestinal bleeding in older persons receiving primary care in a large academic health system. Setting Large, academic health system within Colorado. Patients Patients with an active order for daily low-dose aspirin as of July 1, 2021, were assessed for appropriateness based on indication (primary vs secondary prevention) and use of a concomitant proton-pump inhibitor (PPI). Incident gastrointestinal bleeds (GIBs) in the subsequent 12 months and GIB risk factors were also evaluated. Results A total of 19,525 patients were included in the analysis. Eighty-nine percent of patients identified as White and 54% identified as male. Of the total cohort, 44% had CVD and 19% were co-prescribed a PPI. GIB occurred in 247 patients (1.27%) within the subsequent year. Risk factors significantly associated with a GIB within 1 year included: history of GIB, history of peptic ulcer disease, other esophageal issue (esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, Mallory Weiss tears, etc.), 75 years of age or older, and history of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Conclusion This evaluation found that many older persons at this institution may be inappropriately prescribed aspirin, providing opportunities for pharmacists to improve medication safety by deprescribing aspirin among primary prevention patients or potentially co-prescribing a PPI in secondary prevention patients.

Background In 2019, the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association updated their joint guidelines stating low-dose aspirin should not be used on a routine basis for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) among people older than 70 years of age because of increased bleeding risk.¹ In addition to these updated guidelines, a statement released by the US Preventive Services Task Force in April 2022 recommends against the initiation of low-dose aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people 60 years of age or older.² Despite these updated recommendations, aspirin continues to be a common medication older patients take, providing an opportunity for a clinical pharmacist deprescribing intervention. Objective To identify the role of a pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing intervention within a safety-net health system in the outpatient setting. Methods This project included patients 70 years of age and older who had aspirin listed as an active medication without documented ASCVD. This project assessed aspirin deprescribing rates, time spent on pharmacist outreach, and reasons for patient and/or provider refusal to discontinue aspirin. Results One hundred thirty-one eligible patients were contacted. Of those, 78 (60%) patients discontinued aspirin after speaking with the pharmacist, and 8 patients discontinued aspirin after a clinical pharmacist recommendation to the patient's primary care provider (PCP). The median time spent on outreach was approximately eight minutes. Of the 6 patients who consented to the project but declined to discontinue aspirin therapy based on pharmacist intervention, 5 preferred to discuss the issue with their PCP, while 1 patient was told by an outside provider to take aspirin. Conclusion Results indicate the successful impact a clinical pharmacist may have in deprescribing aspirin in a high-risk population. These data may also suggest that an active and intentional approach to deprescribing is likely to be more effective than a written recommendation to providers.

Background Patients older than 65 years of age with an anticipated life-expectancy of 12 months or less may have complex medication regimens and an increased risk of adverse drug reactions, and drug-drug interactions. Within the Department of Veterans Affairs, a commonly used medication optimization model is known as the VIONE methodology. Objective This project aimed to pilot implementation of board-certified clinical pharmacist practitioners utilizing the VIONE model within a patient-aligned care team targeting patients 65 years of age and older. Methods The population was identified through the VIONE dashboards. Veteran inclusion criteria included five or more medications, a VIONE risk score of 5 or greater, and CAN scores of greater than 90. The project team reached out via telephone to the patients for a medication regimen review and a 14-day follow-up call. Primary outcomes were quantity of medications discontinued per patient, classes of medications that were discontinued, number and encounter time spent, and cost avoidance over 1 year. Secondary outcomes were VIONE classification of medications, VIONE discontinuation reason, number of recommendations given and accepted by primary provider, and safety analysis. Results There were 53 patients who were successfully contacted via telephone. The top four most discontinued medication classes included 1) vitamins/supplements, 2) ophthalmology medications, 3) gastrointestinal medications, and 4) non-controlled analgesic medications. During the project period the potential cost avoidance over 1 year was $17,716. CONCLUSION: This project demonstrated that usage of VIONE methodology ensures medication optimization with minimal harm and provides significant cost savings in the ambulatory care setting.

Previous studies in the ambulatory care setting have shown inconsistent results in regard to, or with respect to pharmacist telephonic transitions of care (TOC) encounters and reduction in 30-day readmission rates. No studies that have been completed within an accountable care organization (ACO) evaluating the impact of telephonic TOC encounters performed by a pharmacist have been identified. The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of clinical pharmacy telephonic TOC encounters on readmission rates within a primary care-based ACO. In this retrospective chart review, data for those who had a pharmacist telephonic TOC encounter and those who had an attempt were collected. The primary outcome of this study was all-cause 30-day readmission rate. Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission rate for targeted disease states, time to readmission, and readmission reason the same as previous discharge reason. For subjects who received a telephonic TOC encounter, pharmacist intervention type and provider acceptance of intervention(s) were described. For the final analysis, 154 encounters were included, 83 encounters in the telephonic TOC encounter group, and 71 did not receive a telephonic TOC encounter. The 30-day readmission rates were similar among those who received a telephonic TOC encounter and those who did not: the difference was not significant (15.7% vs. 28.2%; P = 0.059). There was also no statistical difference in the secondary outcomes. Even so, the results of this study suggest that performing a pharmacist telephonic TOC encounter in a primary care-based ACO setting has the potential to reduce 30-day readmission rates and further research appears to be warranted in this important area of practice.

This article is the third installment of a multi-part series on the history and usage of antipsychotics in older people living in nursing and assisted living facilities. This article presents next steps and recommendations for appropriate usage of antipsychotics in the older population based on the lead author's early drafts, submitted to the editors prior to his untimely death, of this series and on his consultations with the coauthors. Dr Levenson emphasized in his focus on next steps related to antipsychotic use: that all providers should review the history of antipsychotic use and recognize clinically legitimate alternative explanations for the findings. His conclusions were that "off label" usage should not be a reason to exclude the appropriate use of antipsychotics. His overall recommendations to clinicians are to assess and diagnose the underlying cause of the problem, understand the treatment options and select the best one to address the clinical problem and/or the symptom if the problem cannot be fully resolved, and to focus on all medications, not just antipsychotics, in a patient's regimen to aid in a comprehensive understanding of the assessment and inform therapeutic recommendations.

Traditional definitions of polypharmacy may largely not account for the market proliferation of herbal and dietary supplements, cannabis products, or incorporate the new science of pharmacogenomics (PGx). Polypharmacy is encountered by most pharmacists providing patient care in many settings. The "polypharmacist" can assist patients and providers with solving medication-related problems (MRPs) in this new and challenging environment of supplements and cannabis products by utilizing traditional pharmacology and pharmacokinetic principles, including PGx, broadly across many medical disciplines. One may encounter polypharmacy more in the geriatric population, though in an age of supplements and cannabis proliferation, polypharmacy is increasingly being encountered at younger ages. Not only is polypharmacy training at best fragmented in pharmacy curricula, but it may also not account for the above-mentioned products that may use the same metabolic pathways to increase drug interactions and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) regarding prescription medications. Polypharmacy being more formally prioritized in pharmacist training may better prepare pharmacists for commonly encountered polypharmacy and can be a viable model of practice.