Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34072223

ABSTRACT

Complex medication regimens are highly prevalent, burdensome for residents and staff, and associated with poor health outcomes in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). The SIMPLER study was a non-blinded, matched-pair, cluster randomized controlled trial in eight Australian RACFs that investigated the one-off application of a structured 5-step implicit process to simplify medication regimens. The aim of this study was to explore the processes underpinning study implementation and uptake of the medication simplification intervention. A mixed methods process evaluation with an explanatory design was undertaken in parallel with the main outcome evaluation of the SIMPLER study and was guided by an established 8-domain framework. The qualitative component included a document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 25 stakeholders (residents, family, research nurses, pharmacists, RACF staff, and a general medical practitioner). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and reflexively thematically content analyzed. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize quantitative data extracted from key research documents. The SIMPLER recruitment rates at the eight RACFs ranged from 18.9% to 48.6% of eligible residents (38.4% overall). Participation decisions were influenced by altruism, opinions of trusted persons, willingness to change a medication regimen, and third-party hesitation regarding potential resident distress. Intervention delivery was generally consistent with the study protocol. Stakeholders perceived regimen simplification was beneficial and low risk if the simplification recommendations were individualized. Implementation of the simplification recommendations varied between the four intervention RACFs, with simplification implemented at 4-month follow-up for between 25% and 86% of residents for whom simplification was possible. Good working relationships between stakeholders and new remunerated models of medication management were perceived facilitators to wider implementation. In conclusion, the one-off implicit medication simplification intervention was feasible and generally delivered according to the protocol to a representative sample of residents. Despite variable implementation, recommendations to simplify complex regimens were valued by stakeholders, who also supported wider implementation of medication simplification in RACFs.


Subject(s)
Assisted Living Facilities , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Aged , Australia , Humans , Long-Term Care , Pharmacists
2.
J Eval Clin Pract ; 27(1): 103-110, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32285584

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE/AIM: Medication administration is a complex and time-consuming task in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Understanding the time associated with each administration step may help identify opportunities to optimize medication management in RACFs. This study aimed to investigate the time taken to administer medications to residents, including those with complex care needs such as cognitive impairment and swallowing difficulties. METHOD: A time-and-motion study was conducted in three South Australian RACFs. A representative sample of 57 scheduled medication administration rounds in 14 units were observed by a single investigator. The rounds were sampled to include different times of day, memory support units for residents living with dementia and standard units, and medication administration by registered and enrolled nurses. Medications were administered from pre-prepared medication strip packaging. The validated Work Observation Method By Activity Timing (WOMBAT) software was used to record observations. RESULTS: Thirty nurses were observed. The average time spent on scheduled medication administration rounds was 5.2 h/unit of average 22 residents/day. The breakfast medication round had the longest duration (1.92 h/unit). Resident preparation, medication preparation and provision, documentation, transit, communication, and cleaning took an average of 5 minutes per resident per round. Medication preparation and provision comprised 60% of overall medication round time and took significantly longer in memory support than in standard units (66 vs 49 seconds per resident per round for preparation, 79 vs 58 for provision; P < .001 for both). Almost half (42%) of tablets/capsules were crushed in memory support units. The time taken for medication administration was not significantly different among registered and enrolled nurses. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses took an average of 5 minutes to administer medications per resident per medication round. Medication administration in memory support units took an additional minute per resident per round, with almost half of tablets and capsules needing to be crushed.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Aged , Australia , Humans , Time
3.
Clin Interv Aging ; 15: 797-809, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32581521

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Being able to manage a complex medication regimen is key to older people continuing to live at home. This study determined the feasibility of a multi-component intervention to simplify medication regimens for people receiving community-based home care services. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Research nurses recruited people receiving community-based home care services to participate in this non-randomized pilot and feasibility study (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618001130257). Participants received a one-off clinical pharmacist intervention comprising medication reconciliation, assessment of capacity to self-manage medications, and application of a structured 5-step tool to identify medication simplification opportunities. A mixed-methods feasibility assessment with an explanatory design was undertaken to assess recruitment, protocol adherence and stakeholder acceptability. Data from interviews with 12 stakeholders were thematically analyzed. Secondary outcome measures, including medication discrepancies, and changes in number of medication administration times per day, quality of life, medication adherence and health service utilization, were determined over a 4-month follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-five out of the target 50 participants were recruited. Initial recruitment was impacted by apparent uncertain role responsibilities in medication management, with some clients who declined to participate perceiving they would be unlikely to benefit or being reluctant to change regimens. However, with few exceptions, participants who received intervention did so with a high degree of protocol adherence and acceptability. Stakeholders valued the intervention and supported wider implementation. Discrepancies between the baseline medication history from the general medical practitioner and the pharmacist-compiled "best possible medication history" were identified for all participants' regimens (median of 6 per participant), with one-third resolved at follow-up. Simplification was possible for 14 participants (56%) and implemented for 7 (50%) at follow-up. No significant changes in other secondary outcomes were observed. CONCLUSION: The intervention was delivered as planned, and valued by stakeholders. Recruitment barriers should be addressed before wider implementation.


Subject(s)
Home Care Services/statistics & numerical data , Medication Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Medication Errors/prevention & control , Medication Reconciliation/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Australia , Feasibility Studies , Female , General Practitioners , Humans , Male , Pharmacists/statistics & numerical data , Pilot Projects , Quality of Life
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...