Linking Patients' Goals and Priorities to Recommendations for Medication Changes in a Polypharmacy-Focused Structured Clinical Pathway.

Polypharmacy is associated with poorer health outcomes in older adults. It is challenging to minimize the harmful effects of medications while maximizing benefits of single-disease-focused recommendations. Integrating patient input can balance these factors. The objectives are to describe the goals, priorities, and preferences of participants asked about these in a structured process to polypharmacy, and to describe the extent that decision-making within the process mapped onto these, signaling a patient-centered approach. This is a single-group quasi-experimental study, nested within a feasibility randomized controlled trial. Patient goals and priorities were mapped to medication recommendations made during the intervention. Overall, there were 33 participants who reported 55 functional goals and 66 symptom priorities, and 16 participants reported unwanted medications. Overall, 154 recommendations for medication alterations occurred. Of those, 68 (44%) recommendations mapped to the individual's goals and priorities, whereas the rest were based on clinical judgment where no priorities were expressed. Our results signal this process supports a patient-centered approach: allowing conversations around goals and priorities in a structured process to polypharmacy should be integrated into subsequent medication decisions.

Improved cookstoves to reduce household air pollution exposure in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review of intervention studies.

Household air pollution (HAP), primarily from biomass fuels used for cooking, is associated with adverse health outcomes and premature mortality. It affects almost half of the world's population, especially in low-income and low-resourced communities. However, many of the 'improved' biomass cookstoves (ICS) aimed at reducing HAP lack empirical evidence of pollutant reduction and reliability in the field. A scoping review guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute framework was systematically conducted to explore and analyse the characteristics of cookstoves to assess the ICS available to meet the socio-economic and health needs of households in sub-Sahara Africa (sSA). The review searched Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Global Health Database on OVID, BASE, and conducted a grey literature search from 2014 to 2022 for all field-based ICS studies. In addition, user perspectives were explored for cookstoves analysed as available, affordable, and effective in reducing harmful biomass emissions. The search returned 1984 records. Thirty-three references containing 23 ICS brands were included. The cookstoves were analysed into seven categories: (1) efficiency in HAP reduction, (2) availability, (3) affordability, (4) sustainability, (5) safety, (6) health outcomes, and (7) user experience. Most (86.9%) of the improved cookstoves showed a reduction in harmful emission levels compared to the traditional three-stone fire. However, the levels were higher than the WHO-recommended safe levels. Only nine were priced below 40 USD. Users placed emphasis on cookstoves' suitability for cooking, fuel and time savings, safety, and price. Equality in cooking-related gender roles and psychosocial benefits were also reported. The review demonstrated limited field testing, a lack of evidence of ICS emissions in real-life settings in sSA, heterogeneity in emission measurements, and incomplete descriptions of ICS and kitchen features. Gender differences in exposure and psychosocial benefits were also reported. The review recommends improved cookstove promotion alongside additional measures to reduce HAP at a cost affordable to low-resource households. Future research should focus on detailed reporting of study parameters to facilitate effective comparison of ICS performance in different social settings with different local foods and fuel types. Finally, a more community-based approach is needed to assess and ensure user voices are represented in HAP intervention studies, including designing the cookstoves.

Team approach to polypharmacy evaluation and reduction: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy in older adults can be associated with negative outcomes including falls, impaired cognition, reduced quality of life, and general and functional decline. It is not clear to what extent these are reversible if the number of medications is reduced. Primary care does not have a systematic approach for reducing inappropriate polypharmacy, and there are few, if any, approaches that account for the patient's priorities and preferences. The primary objective of this study is to test the effect of TAPER (Team Approach to Polypharmacy Evaluation and Reduction), a structured operationalized clinical pathway focused on reducing inappropriate polypharmacy. TAPER integrates evidence tools for identifying potentially inappropriate medications, tapering, and monitoring guidance and explicit elicitation of patient priorities and preferences. We aim to determine the effect of TAPER on the number of medications (primary outcome) and health-related outcomes associated with polypharmacy in older adults. METHODS: We designed a multi-center randomized controlled trial, with the lead implementation site in Hamilton, Ontario. Older adults aged 70 years or older who are on five or more medications will be eligible to participate. A total of 360 participants will be recruited. Participants will be assigned to either the control or intervention arm. The intervention involves a comprehensive multidisciplinary medication review by pharmacists and physicians in partnership with patients. This review will be focused on reducing medication burden, with the assumption that this will reduce the risks and harms of polypharmacy. The control group is a wait list, and control patients will be given appointments for the TAPER intervention at a date after the final outcome assessment. All patients will be followed up and outcomes measured in both groups at baseline and 6 months. DISCUSSION: Our trial is unique in its design in that it aims to introduce an operationalized structured clinical pathway aimed to reduce polypharmacy in a primary care setting while at the same time recording patient's goals and priorities for treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT02942927. First registered on October 24, 2016.

Which Biomass Stove(s) Capable of Reducing Household Air Pollution Are Available to the Poorest Communities Globally?

Globally, household and ambient air pollution (HAAP) leads to approximately seven million premature deaths per year. One of the main sources of household air pollution (HAP) is the traditional stove. So-called improved cookstoves (ICS) do not reduce emissions to levels that benefit health, but the poorest communities are unlikely to have access to cleaner cooking in the medium term. Therefore, ICS are being promoted as an intermediate step. This paper summarises the current evidence on the ICS available to the global poorest, utilising data from the Clean Cookstoves Catalog and systematic review evidence from the field. The cheapest stoves offer little reduction in HAP. Only one ICS, available at US$5 or less, (the canarumwe) minimally reduced pollutants based on ISO testing standards and no studies included in the systematic reviews reported tested this stove in the field. We recommend field testing all ICS as standard, and clear information on stove characteristics, sustainability, safety, emissions efficiency, in-field performance, affordability, availability in different settings, and the ability of the stove to meet community cooking needs. In addition, ICS should be promoted alongside a suite of measures, including improved ventilation and facilities to dry wood, to further reduce the pollutant levels.

Do improved biomass cookstove interventions improve indoor air quality and blood pressure? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the most recent evidence to examine whether use of improved biomass cookstoves in households in low-middle income countries results in reduction in mean concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter of size 2.5 µm (PM2.5) in the cooking area, as well as reduction in mean systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of adults using the cookstoves when compared to adults who use traditional three stone fire or traditional biomass cookstoves. METHODS: We searched databases of scientific and grey literature. We included studies if published between January 2012 and June 2021, reported impact of ICS interventions in non-pregnant adults in low/middle-income countries, and reported post-intervention results along with baseline of traditional cookstoves. Outcomes included 24- or 48-h averages of kitchen area PM2.5, CO, mean SBP and DBP. Meta-analyses estimated weighted mean differences between baseline and post-intervention values for all outcome measures. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included; ten contributed estimates for HAP and four for BP. Interventions lead to significant reductions in PM2.5 (-0.73 mg/m3, 95% CI: -1.33, -0.13), CO (-8.37 ppm, 95%CI: -13.20, -3.54) and SBP (-2.82 mmHg, 95% CI: -5.53, -0.11); and a non-significant reduction in DBP (-0.80 mmHg, 95%CI: -2.33, 0.73), when compared to baseline of traditional cookstoves. Except for DBP, greatest reductions in all outcomes came from standard combustion ICS with a chimney, compared to ICS without a chimney and advanced combustion ICS. CONCLUSION: Among the reviewed biomass stove types, ICS with a chimney feature resulted in greatest reductions in HAP and BP.

Primary care clinicians' confidence, willingness participation and perceptions of roles in advance care planning discussions with patients: a multi-site survey.

BACKGROUND: People who engage in advance care planning (ACP) are more likely to receive health care that is concordant with their goals at the end of life. Little discussion of ACP occurs in primary care. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe primary care clinicians' perspectives on having ACP conversations with their patients. METHODS: We conducted a survey of family physicians and non-physician clinicians in primary care in 2014-2015. We compared family physicians and non-physician clinicians on willingness, confidence, participation and acceptability for other clinicians to engage in six aspects of ACP (initiating, exchanging information, decision coaching, finalizing plans, helping communicate plans with family members and other health professionals) on scales from 0 = not at all/extremely unacceptable to 6 = very/all the time/extremely acceptable. RESULTS: The response rate was 72% (n = 117) among family physicians and 69% (n = 64) among non-physician clinicians. Mean ratings (standard deviation [SD]) of willingness were high (4.5 [1.4] to 5.0 [1.2] for physicians; 3.4 [1.8] to 4.6 [1.6] non-physician clinicians). There was little participation (mean ratings 2.4 [1.7] to 2.7 [1.6] for physicians, 1.0 [1.5] to 1.4 [1.7] for non-physician clinicians). Non-physician clinicians rated confidence statistically significantly lower than physicians for all ACP aspects. Acceptability for non-physician clinician involvement was high in both groups (mean acceptability ratings greater than 4). CONCLUSION: Current engagement of primary care clinicians in ACP is low. Given the high willingness and acceptability for non-physician clinician involvement, increasing the capacity of non-physician clinicians could enable uptake of ACP in primary care.

Design Process and Utilization of a Novel Clinical Decision Support System for Neuropathic Pain in Primary Care: Mixed Methods Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Computerized clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have emerged as an approach to improve compliance of clinicians with clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Research utilizing CDSS has primarily been conducted in clinical contexts with clear diagnostic criteria such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. In contrast, research on CDSS for pain management and more specifically neuropathic pain has been limited. A CDSS for neuropathic pain has the potential to enhance patient care as the challenge of diagnosing and treating neuropathic pain often leads to tension in clinician-patient relationships. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to design and evaluate a CDSS aimed at improving the adherence of interprofessional primary care clinicians to CPG for managing neuropathic pain. METHODS: Recommendations from the Canadian CPGs informed the decision pathways. The development of the CDSS format and function involved participation of multiple stakeholders and end users in needs assessment and usability testing. Clinicians, including family medicine physicians, residents, and nurse practitioners, in three academic teaching clinics were trained in the use of the CDSS. Evaluation over one year included the measurement of utilization of the CDSS; change in reported awareness, agreement, and adoption of CPG recommendations; and change in the observed adherence to CPG recommendations. RESULTS: The usability testing of the CDSS was highly successful in the prototype environment. Deployment in the clinical setting was partially complete by the time of the study, with some limitations in the planned functionality. The study population had a high level of awareness, agreement, and adoption of guideline recommendations before implementation of CDSS. Nevertheless, there was a small and statistically significant improvement in the mean awareness and adoption scores over the year of observation (P=.01 for mean awareness scores at 6 and 12 months compared with baseline, for mean adoption scores at 6 months compared with baseline, and for mean adoption scores at 12 months). Documenting significant findings related to diagnosis of neuropathic pain increased significantly. Clinicians accessed CPG information more frequently than they utilized data entry functions. Nurse practitioners and first year family medicine trainees had higher utilization than physicians. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a small increase in the adherence to CPG recommendations for managing neuropathic pain. Clinicians utilized the CDSS more as a source of knowledge and as a training tool than as an ongoing dynamic decision support.

'I think this medicine actually killed my wife': patient and family perspectives on shared decision-making to optimize medications and safety.

BACKGROUND: This study explored the perspectives and experiences from patients and families around how patient/family preferences and priorities are considered in medication-related discussions and decisions within the healthcare system. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using focus groups with residents of Southern Ontario and British Columbia (N = 16). Three focus groups were conducted using a semi-structured focus group guide. The audiotaped focus group discussions were transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis, using inductive coding, was completed. RESULTS: A total of three main themes [and several sub-themes (and sub-sub-themes)] emerged from the data: patient and family expertise [lived experience, information expert, and perceived expert roles (patient/family, healthcare provider)], perceived patient-centredness (relationship qualities of healthcare provider and assumptions about patients), and system (time, coordination and communication, and culture). Stories told by participants helped to clarify the relationships between the themes and sub-themes, leading to, what we understand as shared decision-making around medications and subsequent health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed that shared decision-making resulted from both recognition and integration of the personal expertise of the patient and family in medications, and perceived patient-centredness. This is broadly consistent with the current conceptualization of evidence-based medicine. The stories told highlight the complex, dynamic, and nonlinear nature of shared decision-making for medications, and that patient priorities are not as integrated into shared decision-making about medications as we would hope. This suggests the need for developing a systematic process to elicit, record, and integrate patient preferences and priorities about medications to create space for a more patient-centred conversation.

Demonstrating a Technology-Mediated Intervention to Support Medication Adherence in Community-Dwelling Older Adults in Primary Care: A Feasibility Study.

Background: Medication non-adherence can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. This 4-week feasibility study aims to demonstrate that the eDosette intervention can be implemented with older adults in primary care. Method: Fifty-six older adults from four primary care sites in Southwestern Ontario, Canada participated. The intervention involved generating, for pharmacist review, weekly medication administration records based on transmitted data captured by the eDosette. The primary outcome is implementation feasibility defined by recruitment, adherence rates, frequency of captured missed and late doses, descriptions of clinical work resulting from the intervention, and participant feedback. Results: The recruitment rate was 24% (57/240); one withdrew due to personal reasons. The mean observed adherence rate was 82% (range 49%-100%). Overall, participants missed 505 and took 2,105 doses late; 118 clinical decisions occurred with 72 unique medication changes in 31 participants. Participants found the eDosette easy to use and did not feel that they were viewed negatively because of their potential non-adherence. Conclusion: The eDosette intervention could be feasibly implemented in primary care with older adults. Providing information about when an older adult takes their medications could play a role in medication adherence by prompting more informed discussions between the older adult and primary care clinicians.