A Longitudinal Observational Study of Medical Cannabis Use and Polypharmacy among Patients Presenting to Dispensaries in Pennsylvania.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis use is increasing among adults to treat a variety of health conditions. Given the potential for interactions and adverse events, it is important to assess the use of medical cannabis along with other concomitant medications when assessing for polypharmacy. METHODS: The objective of this observational, longitudinal study was to examine medical cannabis (MC) use along with concomitant medications over 12 months in patients with serious medical conditions enrolled in the Pennsylvania (PA) Department of Health's (DOH) Medical Marijuana Program and to collect and catalog which forms of MC patients are taking along with their concomitant medications. RESULTS: There were 213 participants who completed the baseline surveys in full, and 201, 187, and 175 who completed the 1, 6, and 12-month follow-up surveys. The mean age of the participants was 41.3 years, and 54.5% were female. The mean number of MC products taken at baseline was 3.41 and 3.47 at the 12-month survey. Participants took an average of 3.76 (SD 3.15) medications at baseline and 3.65 (SD 3.4) at 12 months. Most commonly used concomitant medications at baseline included vitamins (42.3%), antidepressants (29.1%), analgesics (22.1%), herbal products (19.7%), and anxiolytics (17.8%). CONCLUSION: Participants used multiple medical cannabis products to treat a number of medication conditions in conjunction with multiple medications.

Characterizing anxiety, pain, sleep, and quality of life among patients in a state Medical Marijuana Program.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis is increasingly used for symptom management, but its effects on health-related quality of life (QoL) have been inconclusive. OBJECTIVES: The goal of the present study was to characterize self-reported symptoms and QoL among patients certified to use medical cannabis. METHODS: These data are from the baseline assessment of a 12-month longitudinal study. The survey assessed certifying conditions, current medications, symptoms and symptom severity. QoL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care (FACIT-Pal) which includes Physical Well-Being (PWB), Social/Family Well-Being (SWB), Emotional Well-Being (EWB), Functional Well-Being (FWB), and the Palliative Care subscale. Higher scores indicated better QoL. RESULTS: Overall, 210 patients (114 female, 92 male, 3 non-binary, 1 refused) completed the survey. The most common certifying conditions were pain (48.6%), anxiety (36.7%), and PTSD (15.7%) and the most common symptoms were anxiety (65.2%), pain (56.7%), sleep disturbance (38.6%), and depression (31.4%). Compared to normative data, this sample reported lower QoL, specifically EWB and SWB scores (i.e., T-Scores<45). Opioid/benzodiazepine/sedative-hypnotic use was associated with lower QoL on all subscales (except SWB and FWB) (ps < 0.05). Greater number of self-reported symptoms and medical conditions were associated with lower QoL (ps < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Despite mixed evidence regarding cannabis' efficacy for anxiety, 36.7% of the current sample were certified by a physician for anxiety. Lower QoL was associated with more self-reported comorbid medical conditions, higher total symptom count, and reported use of an opioid and/or benzodiazepine. Future longitudinal data will provide critical information regarding the trajectory of these symptoms and QoL.

Cannabis Use in Patients With Cancer: A Clinical Review.

Cannabis use and interest continues to increase among patients with cancer and caregivers. High-quality research remains scant in many areas, causing hesitancy or discomfort among most clinical providers. Although we have limitations on hard outcomes, we can provide some guidance and more proactively engage in conversations with patients and family about cannabis. Several studies support the efficacy of cannabis for various cancer and treatment-related symptoms, such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and cancer pain. Although formulations and dosing guidelines for clinicians do not formally exist at present, attention to tetrahydrocannabinol concentration and understanding of risks with inhalation can reduce risk. Conflicting information exists on the interaction between cannabis and immunotherapy as well as estrogen receptor interactions. Motivational interviewing can help engage in more productive, less stigmatized conversations.

Polypharmacy in the Geriatric Oncology Population.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review explores the multiple definitions, epidemiology, and impact of polypharmacy in geriatric oncology patients. Risk factors and clinical implications of polypharmacy are delineated and potential clinical approaches to reduce polypharmacy are reviewed. RECENT FINDINGS: Most sources currently define polypharmacy as the administration of multiple medications that are non-essential, unnecessary, duplicative, or ineffective. Possible risk factors associated with polypharmacy in geriatric cancer patients include comorbid conditions, prescribing cascades, and hospitalization. Consequences of polypharmacy in this population include adverse drug events, drug-drug interactions, reduced adherence, frailty, and increased morbidity. Clinical approaches to the reduction of polypharmacy include thorough medication histories and an interprofessional team approach to care. Polypharmacy is common and has a direct clinical impact on geriatric oncology patients. There is a clear deficit in our understanding of the scope and impact of polypharmacy in this population and only limited evaluation of various interventions exist. The paucity of information is at least partially linked to the consistent exclusion of older adults in cancer studies and the complex interaction between polypharmacy and potential morbidities/mortality.

Deprescribing: A simple method for reducing polypharmacy.

Polypharmacy brings with it increased risks for adverse drug events and reduced functional capacity. This 4-step plan will help you safely deprescribe in older adults.

Clinical consequences of polypharmacy in elderly.

INTRODUCTION: Polypharmacy, defined as the use of multiple drugs or more than are medically necessary, is a growing concern for older adults. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from January 1, 1986 to June 30, 2013) to identify relevant articles in people aged > 65 years. AREAS COVERED: We present information about: i) prevalence of polypharmacy and unnecessary medication use; ii) negative consequences of polypharmacy; and iii) interventions to improve polypharmacy. EXPERT OPINION: International research shows that polypharmacy is common in older adults with the highest number of drugs taken by those residing in nursing homes. Nearly 50% of older adults take one or more medications that are not medically necessary. Research has clearly established a strong relationship between polypharmacy and negative clinical consequences. Moreover, well-designed interprofessional (often including clinical pharmacist) intervention studies that focus on enrolling high-risk older patients with polypharmacy have shown that they can be effective in reducing aspects of unnecessary prescribing with mixed results on distal health outcomes.

Polypharmacy, adverse drug reactions, and geriatric syndromes.

The elderly are at risk for polypharmacy, which is associated with significant consequences such as adverse effects, medication nonadherence, drug-drug and drug-disease interactions, and increased risk of geriatric syndromes. Providers should evaluate all existing medications at each patient visit for appropriateness and weigh the risks and benefits of starting new medications to minimize polypharmacy.

Polypharmacy and health beliefs in older outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is a significant problem among older adults. Patient-related characteristics and beliefs have not been the focus of prior research in this area, which has primarily evaluated the effects of patients' health status and health care system factors. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this research was to determine the prevalence and predictors of unnecessary drug use in older veteran outpatients, with a focus on patient-related factors and health beliefs. METHODS: Community-dwelling veterans aged > or =60 years, with > or =5 self-administered medications per day, not cognitively impaired, able to speak and/or write English, and receiving primary care and medications from a large urban Veterans Affairs Medical Center were eligible for study. Assessment of unnecessary drug use was determined by clinical pharmacists applying the criteria of the Medication Appropriateness Index to each regularly scheduled medication. Those drugs that received an inappropriate rating for indication, effectiveness, or therapeutic duplication were defined as unnecessary. Health beliefs regarding medication use were assessed with decisional balance, self-efficacy, and health locus of control scales. RESULTS: A total of 128 veterans (mean [SD] age, 72.0 [8.9] years; 93.0% white; 93.0% male) were enrolled. Analysis showed that 58.6% of patients had > or =1 unnecessary prescribed drug; the most common reason for a medication being considered inappropriate was lack of effectiveness (41.4%). The most commonly prescribed unnecessary drug classes were central nervous system (19.5%), gastrointestinal (18.0%), and vitamins (16.4%). Factors with tendency for association (P < 0.20) with any unnecessary drug use included race (white), income (<$30,000/year), number of prescription medications (mean [SD], 6.8 [2.8]), and lack of belief in a "powerful other" for their health locus of control. CONCLUSIONS: We found a very high prevalence of unnecessary drug use in this older veteran outpatient population. Race, income, and polypharmacy, as well as health-related beliefs, were central factors associated with unnecessary drug use.

Polypharmacy in elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy (ie, the use of multiple medications and/or the administration of more medications than are clinically indicated, representing unnecessary drug use) is common among the elderly. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this research was to provide a description of observational studies examining the epidemiology of polypharmacy and to review randomized controlled studies that have been published in the past 2 decades designed to reduce polypharmacy in older adults. METHODS: Materials for this review were gathered from a search of the MEDLINE database (1986-June 2007) and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1986-June 2007) to identify articles in people aged >65 years. We used a combination of the following search terms: polypharmacy, multiple medications, polymedicine, elderly, geriatric, and aged. A manual search of the reference lists from identified articles and the authors' article files, book chapters, and recent reviews was conducted to identify additional articles. From these, the authors identified those studies that measured polypharmacy. RESULTS: The literature review found that polypharmacy continues to increase and is a known risk factor for important morbidity and mortality. There are few rigorously designed intervention studies that have been shown to reduce unnecessary polypharmacy in older adults. The literature review identified 5 articles, which are included here. All studies showed an improvement in polypharmacy. CONCLUSIONS: Many studies have found that various numbers of medications are associated with negative health outcomes, but more research is needed to further delineate the consequences associated with unnecessary drug use in elderly patients. Health care professionals should be aware of the risks and fully evaluate all medications at each patient visit to prevent polypharmacy from occurring.

Clinically important drug-disease interactions and their prevalence in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Older adults may have decreased homeostatic reserve, have multiple chronic diseases, and take multiple medications. Therefore, they are at risk for adverse outcomes after receiving a drug that exacerbates a chronic disease. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to compile a list of clinically important drug-disease interactions in older adults, obtain the consensus of a multidisciplinary panel of geriatric health care professionals on these interactions, and determine the prevalence of these interactions in a sample of outpatients. METHODS: This analysis included a 2-round modified Delphi survey and cross-sectional study. Possible drug-disease interactions in patients aged > or =65 years were identified through a search of the English-language literature indexed on MEDLINE and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1966-July 2004) using terms that included drug-disease interaction, medication errors, and inappropriate prescribing. Nine health care professionals with expertise in geriatrics (2 geriatricians, 7 geriatric clinical pharmacist specialists) were selected based on specialty training and continuing clinical work in geriatrics, academic appointments, and geographic location. The panel rated the importance of the potential drug-disease interactions using a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = definitely not serious to 5 = definitely serious). Consensus on a drug-disease interaction was defined as a lower bound of the 95% CI > or =4.0. The prevalence of drug-disease interactions was determined by applying the consensus criteria to a convenience sample of frail older veterans at hospital discharge who were enrolled in a health services intervention trial. RESULTS: The panel reached consensus on 28 individual drug-disease interactions involving 14 diseases or conditions. Overall, 205 (15.3%) of the 1340 veterans in the sample had > or =1 drug-disease interaction. The 2 most common drug-disease interactions were use of first-generation calcium channel blockers in patients with congestive heart failure and use of aspirin in patients with peptic ulcer disease (both, 3.7%). CONCLUSIONS: A survey of multidisciplinary geriatric health care professionals resulted in a concise consensus list of clinically important drug-disease interactions in older adults. Further research is needed to examine the impact of these drug-disease interactions on health outcomes and their applicability as national measures for the prevention of drug-related problems.

Incidence and predictors of all and preventable adverse drug reactions in frail elderly persons after hospital stay.

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug reactions (ADR) negatively impact life quality and are sometimes fatal. This study examines the incidence and predictors of all and preventable ADRs in frail elderly persons after hospital discharge, a highly vulnerable but rarely studied population. METHODS: The design was a prospective cohort study involving 808 frail elderly persons who were discharged from 11 Veteran Affairs hospitals to outpatient care. The main outcome measure was number of ADRs per patient as determined by blinded geriatrician and geropharmacist pairs using Naranjo's ADR algorithm. For all ADRs (possible, probable, or definite), preventability was assessed. Discordances were resolved by consensus conferences. RESULTS: Overall, 33% of patients had one or more ADRs for a rate of 1.92 per 1000 person-days of follow-up. The rate for preventable ADRs was 0.71 per 1000 person-days of follow-up. Independent risk factors for all ADRs were number of medications (adjusted [Adj.] hazard ratio [HR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.10 per medication), use of warfarin (Adj. HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.22-1.87), and (marginally) the use of benzodiazepines (Adj. HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.95-1.58). Counterintuitively, use of sedatives and/or hypnotics was inversely related to ADR risk (Adj. HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.04-0.57). Similar trends were seen for number of medications and warfarin use as predictors of preventable ADRs. CONCLUSIONS: ADRs are very common in frail elderly persons after hospital stay, and polypharmacy and warfarin use consistently increase the risk of ADRs.

Unnecessary drug use in frail older people at hospital discharge.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and predictors of unnecessary drug use at hospital discharge in frail elderly patients. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Eleven Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred eighty-four frail older patients from the Geriatric Evaluation and Management Drug Study. MEASUREMENTS: Assessment of unnecessary drug use was determined by the consensus of a clinical pharmacist and physician pair applying the Medication Appropriateness Index to each regularly scheduled medication at hospital discharge. Those drugs that received an inappropriate rating for indication, efficacy, or therapeutic duplication were defined as unnecessary. RESULTS: Forty-four percent of patients had at least one unnecessary drug, with the most common reason being lack of indication. The most commonly prescribed unnecessary drug classes were gastrointestinal, central nervous system, and therapeutic nutrients/minerals. Factors associated (P<.05) with unnecessary drug use included hypertension (adjusted odds ratio (AOR)=0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.38-0.96), multiple prescribers (AOR=3.35, 95% CI=1.16-9.68), and nine or more medications (AOR=2.24, 95% CI=1.25-3.99). CONCLUSION: A high prevalence of unnecessary drug use at discharge was found in frail hospitalized elderly patients. Additional studies are needed to identify predictors and prevalence of unnecessary drug use in nonveteran populations so that interventions can be designed to reduce the problem.

Potential drug-disease interactions in frail, hospitalized elderly veterans.

BACKGROUND: Drugs can improve quality of life for many older people, but they may cause adverse health outcomes (eg, drug-disease interactions) if used inappropriately. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of potential drug-disease interactions as defined by explicit criteria and examine associations between sociodemographic and health status variables and potential drug-disease interactions. METHODS: The study design was cross-sectional. We evaluated 397 frail elderly inpatients from the Geriatric Evaluation and Management trial conducted at 11 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Drug-disease interactions were defined using explicit criteria from consensus expert panels of geriatricians from the US and Canada. RESULTS: Overall, 159 (40.1%) patients had one or more potential drug-disease interaction. The most common potential interactions were calcium-channel blockers and heart failure (12.3%) and beta-blockers and diabetes (6.8%). Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that age > or =75 years (adjusted OR 2.43; 95% CI 1.52 to 3.88), being married (adjusted OR 1.77; 95% CI 1.11 to 2.82), comorbidity index defined by Charlson method (adjusted OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.34), and use of multiple prescription drugs (5-8: adjusted OR 4.17; 95% CI 1.96 to 8.88, > or =9: adjusted OR 9.22; 95% CI 4.26 to 19.95), were significantly (p < 0.05) associated with having one or more potential drug-disease interaction. CONCLUSIONS: Potential drug-disease interactions are common in hospitalized elderly patients and are related to specific sociodemographic and health status factors. Further research is needed to examine the relationship between health outcomes and drug-disease interactions.

Update on drug-related problems in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Although pharmacotherapy for the elderly can treat diseases and improve well-being, its benefits can be compromised by drug-related problems. OBJECTIVE: This article reviews recent publications concerning drug-related problems in the elderly, as well as articles describing the development of 3 sets of quality indicators for medication use in the elderly. METHODS: Relevant articles were identified through a search of MEDLINE (2002-March 2003) for articles on drug-related problems, inappropriate prescribing, and adverse drug events in the elderly. RESULTS: The review included 7 articles published in 2002 and 2003. A study in ambulatory elderly persons reported that approximately 5.0% of patients had > or =1 adverse drug event within the previous year. Another study found that approximately 20.0% of ambulatory elderly persons used > or =1 inappropriate drug, as defined by drug utilization review (DUR) criteria, with drug-disease interactions and duration of use being the most common drug-related problems. A third study involving elderly individuals in assisted living facilities found that 16.0% used > or =1 inappropriate drug, as defined by the Beers criteria. Another study examined whether inappropriate drug use, as defined by the Beers or DUR criteria, was associated with death or a decline in functional status; it found that only use of drugs defined as inappropriate by DUR criteria (particularly those drugs associated with drug-drug or drug-disease interactions) was associated with a decline in the ability to perform basic self-care. Three studies, 1 from the United States, 1 from the United Kingdom, and 1 from Canada, described consensus development of quality indicators for drug use in the elderly, including drugs to avoid, maximum daily dose, drug duplication, limits on duration of use, drug-drug and drug-disease interactions, need for drug monitoring, underuse of necessary drugs to treat or prevent common problems, and inappropriate drug-administration technique. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-related problems are common in elderly patients. Data from recently published studies provide guidance to practitioners and directions for future research.

Adverse drug reaction risk factors in older outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are common in older (age >or=65 years) outpatients (prevalence, 5%-35%), but there is no consensus on factors that put these patients at high risk for ADRs. Identifying a uniform set of risk factors would be helpful to develop risk models for ADRs for older outpatients and to implement targeted interventions for those patients at high risk for ADRs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify potential risk factors for ADRs in older outpatients through a survey of geriatric experts and to determine their prevalence. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to find published articles on ADRs in older patients. Forty-four potential risk factors were identified through the literature search and 6 additional factors were suggested by the expert panel. Through a modified 2-round survey, based on the Delphi consensus method, of an expert panel of 5 physicians and 5 pharmacists, the probability that each of these 50 potential factors could contribute independently to placing an older outpatient at high risk for an ADR was rated on a 5-point Likert scale. After the survey responses were received, means and 95% Cls were calculated. Consensus was defined as a lower 95% confidence limit >or=4.0. Potential risk factors that reached consensus were then applied to a sample of older outpatients to determine their prevalence. RESULTS: After 2 rounds, the expert panel reached consensus on 21 factors, including 12 medication-related factors and 9 patient characteristics. The most prevalent medication-related risk factors were opioid analgesics; warfarin; non-acetylsalicylic acid, non-cyclooxygenase-2 nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; anticholinergics; and benzodiazepines. The most prevalent patient characteristics included polypharmacy, multiple chronic medical problems, prior ADR, and dementia. CONCLUSIONS: An expert panel was able to reach a consensus on potential risk factors that increase the risk for ADRs in older outpatients. Many risk factors were common in a sample of older outpatients. Future research is needed to determine the predictive validity of these risk factors for ADRs in older outpatients.