The clinical application of venous ultrasound in diagnosis and follow-up of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT): a case-based discussion.

Current clinical practice guidelines lack explicit guidance on the indications and appropriate timing of venous ultrasound (US) in lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) follow-up. Moreover, abnormal findings reported on venous US in DVT follow-up or suspected recurrent DVT may be difficult for clinicians to interpret, which carries risk of harm from inappropriate use of anti- coagulation and increased healthcare resource utilization. Due to the above factors, over-use of ultrasound in diagnosis and follow-up of lower extremity DVT has been reported in western health systems. We have undertaken a case-based discussion and a scoping review of existing guidelines on the use of venousUS following prior diagnosis of DVT, to guide appropriate interpretation of commonly reported US abnormalities and provide our suggestions in the light of best available evidence on appropriate timing to perform follow-up US in management of lower extremity DVT.

Improving quantification of anticholinergic burden using the Anticholinergic Effect on Cognition Scale - a healthcare improvement study in a geriatric ward setting.

OBJECTIVE: Anticholinergic burden refers to the cumulative effects of taking multiple medications with anticholinergic effects. This study was carried out in a public hospital in Singapore, aimed to improve and achieve a 100% comprehensive identification and review of measured, anticholinergic burden in a geriatric psychiatry liaison service to geriatric wards. We evaluated changes in pre-to post-assessment anticholinergic burden scores and trainee feedback. METHOD: Plan Do Study Act methodology was employed, and Anticholinergic Effect on Cognition scale (AEC) was implemented as the study intervention. A survey instrument evaluated trainee feedback. RESULTS: There was no measured anticholinergic burden in a baseline of 170 assessments. 75 liaison psychiatry assessments were conducted between June and November 2021 in two cycles. 94.7% of pre-assessments (at the time of assessment) and 71.1% of post-assessments (following assessment) had a record of AEC scores in clinical documentation in cycle one, improving in the second cycle to 100%, 94.6%, respectively. A high post-assessment AEC score of 3 and over reduced from 15.8% in cycle one to 5.4% in cycle two. The trainee feedback suggested an enriching educational experience. CONCLUSIONS: Using the AEC scale, the findings support the feasibility of comprehensive identification and review of measured anticholinergic burden in older people with neurocognitive disorders.

Medication discrepancies and associated risk factors identified among elderly patients discharged from a tertiary hospital in Singapore.

INTRODUCTION: Medication discrepancies and poor documentation of medication changes (e.g. lack of justification for medication change) in physician discharge summaries can lead to preventable medication errors and adverse outcomes. This study aimed to identify and characterise discrepancies between preadmission and discharge medication lists, to identify associated risk factors, and in cases of intentional medication discrepancies, to determine the adequacy of the physician discharge summaries in documenting reasons for the changes. METHODS: A retrospective clinical record review of 150 consecutive elderly patients was done to estimate the number of medication discrepancies between preadmission and discharge medication lists. The two lists were compared for discrepancies (addition, omission or duplication of medications, and/or a change in dosage, frequency or formulation of medication). The patients' clinical records and physician discharge summaries were reviewed to determine whether the discrepancies found were intentional or unintentional. Physician discharge summaries were reviewed to determine if the physicians endorsed and documented reasons for all intentional medication changes. RESULTS: A total of 279 medication discrepancies were identified, of which 42 were unintentional medication discrepancies (35 were related to omission/addition of a medication and seven were related to a change in medication dosage/frequency) and 237 were documented intentional discrepancies. Omission of the baseline medication was the most common unintentional discrepancy. No reasons were provided in the physician discharge summaries for 54 (22.8%) of the intentional discrepancies. CONCLUSION: Unintentional medication discrepancies are a common occurrence at hospital discharge. Physician discharge summaries often do not have adequate information on the reasons for medication changes.

Proton pump inhibitors: Are we still prescribing them without valid indications?

BACKGROUND: Evidence from several Western studies has shown an alarmingly high and inappropriate rate of prescription of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), which may be associated with increased healthcare costs and adverse outcomes. PPI prescribing patterns remain largely unknown in well-developed healthcare systems in Southeast Asia. AIMS: We aimed to determine the prevalence of inappropriate prescription of PPI among elderly patients without documentation of valid indications, in a tertiary teaching hospital in Singapore. METHOD: We carried out a retrospective clinical records review of 150 elderly patients aged ≥65 years that had been admitted to two internal medicine wards between 25 May 2011 and 28 June 2011 to determine the appropriateness of indications for PPIs prescribed at hospital discharge. PPI indications were categorised as "valid", "likely invalid", and "probable" based on current clinical literature. Pre-admission and discharge prescriptions were reviewed to determine continuation of pre-admission and new PPI prescriptions at discharge. Data on clinical characteristics and concurrent use of ulcerogenic medications were collected. RESULTS: From a total of 150 patients, 80 (53 per cent) received prescriptions for PPIs. Of these, 65 (81.2 per cent) had no valid documented indications (i.e., the indication was classed as "likely invalid"); 10 (12.5 per cent) had valid indications; and in five cases (6.2 per cent) the indication was "probable". The most common "likely invalid" indication was primary gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis (GIP) among low-dose aspirin users in 28 patients (43 per cent) of invalid PPI prescriptions. CONCLUSION: Inappropriate prescribing of PPIs without documented valid indications was prevalent among elderly patients at our tertiary teaching hospital in Singapore, providing evidence that shows a similar trend to PPI prescribing to data from Western countries.