Senior Care Pharmacist最新文献

There is limited research on the impact of fall prevention education for older community-living people led by student pharmacists, which includes a medication review to identify Fall Risk-Increasing Drugs (FRIDs). Study objectives were to first assess the knowledge and behavioral intentions of older people after attending a student pharmacist-led fall-prevention program (FPP) and secondly to quantify the number of FRIDs identified during a medication review. Between October 2022 and April 2023, four independent-living facilities and two senior centers served as programming locations. Events began with a fall prevention-focused presentation provided by student pharmacists. Attendees voluntarily filled out surveys to assess their knowledge and behavioral intentions regarding fall prevention. Optional medication reviews were offered. Additional survey questions were asked of medication review participants. If FRIDs were identified, the individual was provided documentation to share with their prescriber. Fall prevention bingo was offered at select events to review educational content and engage those waiting for a medication review. Eighty-six older people attended the presentations; 45 people completed medication reviews across six sites. Survey information was available for 65 presentation attendees and 29 medication review participants. After programming, 64 out of 65 participants stated they felt comfortable speaking to their pharmacist or provider about falls and their medications. Most survey respondents correctly selected which medications increase fall risk. Twenty-two of 29 medication review participants were taking at least one FRID. The FPP described showed positive results through a post-survey evaluation. Participants demonstrated knowledge of fall hazards including medications and a willingness to discuss falls and FRIDs with health professionals. These factors may lead to concrete interventions to avoid falls and their associated health consequences for older people.

Background Recent cardiovascular guideline updates recommend against the use of aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in older people. However, aspirin use remains common in this population. Objective To implement and evaluate the benefit of a pharmacist-driven aspirin deprescribing protocol compared with primary care provider (PCP) education-only in a primary care setting. Methods This prospective, cohort project targeted deprescribing for patients prescribed aspirin for primary prevention of ASCVD. Patients were included if they received primary care services at the Milwaukee Veterans Health Administration Medical Center (VHA) and were 70 years of age or older. Criteria for exclusion were aspirin obtained outside the VHA system, aspirin prescribed for a non-ASCVD-related condition, and/or a history of ASCVD. Active deprescribing by pharmacists and PCP education took place in the intervention group with PCP education only in the standard-of-care group. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had aspirin deprescribed in each group. Secondary outcomes included patient acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Results A total of 520 patients were prescribed aspirin in the intervention group versus 417 in the education-only group. Sixty-five patients met intervention criteria and were contacted for aspirin deprescribing. The pharmacist-led active deprescribing group led to a higher rate of aspirin deprescriptions versus the education-only group (54% vs 18%; P = 0.0001) for patients who met criteria. Conclusion A pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing protocol within a primary care setting significantly decreased the number of aspirin prescriptions compared with PCP education only.

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.