Exploration of Symptom Scale as an Outcome for Deprescribing: A Medication Review Study in Nursing Homes.

The use of inappropriate medication is an increasing problem among the elderly, leading to hospitalizations, mortality, adverse effects, and lower quality of life (QoL). Deprescribing interventions (e.g., medication reviews (MRs)) have been examined as a possible remedy for this problem. In order to be able to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of a deprescribing intervention, quality of life (QoL) has increasingly been used as an outcome. The sensitivity of QoL measurements may, however, not be sufficient to detect a change in specific disease symptoms, e.g., a flair-up in symptoms or relief of side effects after deprescribing. Using symptom assessments as an outcome, we might be able to identify and evaluate the adverse effects of overmedication and deprescribing alike. The objective of this study was to explore whether symptom assessment is a feasible and valuable method of evaluating outcomes of MRs among the elderly in nursing homes. To the best of our knowledge, this has not been investigated before. We performed a feasibility study based on an experimental design and conducted MRs for elderly patients in nursing homes. Their symptoms were registered at baseline and at a follow-up 3 months after performing the MR. In total, 86 patients, corresponding to 68% of the included patients, received the MR and completed the symptom questionnaires as well as the QoL measurements at baseline and follow-up, respectively. Forty-eight of these patients had at least one deprescribing recommendation implemented. Overall, a tendency towards the improvement of most symptoms was seen after deprescribing, which correlated with the tendencies observed for the QoL measurements. Remarkably, deprescribing did not cause a deterioration of symptoms or QoL, which might otherwise be expected for patients of this age group, of whom the health is often rapidly declining. In conclusion, it was found that symptom assessments were feasible among nursing home residents and resulted in additional relevant information about the potential benefits and harms of deprescribing. It is thus recommended to further explore the use of symptom assessment as an outcome of deprescribing interventions, e.g., in a controlled trial.

A systematic review of blood eosinophils and continued treatment with inhaled corticosteroids in patients with COPD.

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been debated for 20 years. In our systematic literature review and meta-analysis, we addressed the following: Should patients with COPD and a blood eosinophil count (EOS) of, respectively, a) < 150 cells/µl, b) 150-300 cells/µl, and c) > 300 cells/µl continue treatment with ICS? Protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020178110) and funded by the Danish Health Authority. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Central on 22nd July 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCT) of ICS treatment in patients with COPD (≥40 years, no current asthma), which analyzed outcomes by EOS count and where >50% of patients used ICS prior. We used the GRADE method. Meta-analyzes for the outcomes were divided into EOS subgroups and analyzed for differences. We identified 11 RCTs with a total of 29,654 patients. A significant difference (p < 0.00001) between the three subgroups' reduction of risk of moderate to severe exacerbation was found. Rate ratios for EOS counts: <150 cells/µL was 0.88 (95%CI: 0.83, 0.94); 150-300 cells/µL was 0.80 (95%CI: 0.69, 0.94); >300 cells/µL was 0.57 (95%CI: 0.49, 0.66). Overall, the certainty of the effect estimates was low to very low due to risk of bias, unexplained heterogeneity, few RCTs, and wide confidence intervals. A clear correlation was demonstrated between effect of continued ICS treatment (number of exacerbations, lung function, and quality of life) and increasing EOS count. Our meta-analyses suggested that treatment with ICS seemed beneficial for everyone except patients with EOS count below 150 cells/µl.

Systematic Medication Review in General Practice by an Interdisciplinary Team: A thorough but Laborious Method to Address Polypharmacy among Elderly Patients.

Polypharmacy increases the risk of hospitalization but may be reduced by medication review. The study objective is to describe and evaluate a method for conducting medication review in general practice by an interdisciplinary medication team of pharmacists and physicians-in this case conducted by a team from the Department of Clinical Pharmacology-based on information concerning medication, diagnosis, relevant laboratory data and medical history supplied by the general practitioner. We discussed the medication review with the patients' general practitioners and received feedback from them regarding acceptance rates of the recommended changes. Ninety-four patients with a total of 1471 prescriptions were included. A medication change was recommended for nearly half of the prescriptions (48%); at least one change of medication was recommended for all patients. The acceptance rate for recommended medication changes was 55%, corresponding to a mean of 4.2 accepted recommendations per patient. For 18% of all 1471 prescriptions, the general practitioner agreed either to discontinue (stop the medication completely) or reduce the dose of the medication. This method is thorough, but since it requires several healthcare professionals, it is rather time-consuming. There is a need to support medication review in general practice, but although this method may be too time consuming in most cases, it may nevertheless prove to be a useful tool managing the most complicated patients.