ABSTRACT
Background: Dysphagia is common in nursing home (NH) residents. Staff may not always be able to access speech and language therapist (SLT) assessments in a timely manner and there are some reports of nurses initiating or changing modified diets in these circumstances. Methods: A mixed quantitative and qualitative approach was used to analyse responses to an online anonymized survey of senior nurses working in Irish NHs. They were asked about their experience of delays accessing SLT services and whether they would ever initiate or change modified diets. Respondents were asked if they would give water to a thirsty resident, prescribed mildly thick liquids, who demanded it on a hot day because thickened fluid was not thirst quenching. Results: Of 77 nurses surveyed, 63 (82%) responded. Three quarters reported delays accessing SLT services sometimes or often. Thirty-four (54.0%) would not give the thirsty resident water. About 70% reported that thickened fluids or modified texture diets were started without SLT sometimes or often. A third of respondents would thicken fluids or modify food to a greater extent than previously recommended but very few would make a diet less restrictive. The main themes that emerged from the comments provided were related to the uncertainty and dilemmas created for staff, what mitigating actions they might take in those circumstances and the need for better guidance and better access to SLT services. Discussion: Delays accessing SLT services are common for Irish NHs, and staff may initiate or change modified diets themselves in these circumstances. The responses suggest a widespread, and unjustified, belief that thicker or more modified is better for those with dysphagia. Clear and accurate guidance, and a better SLT service, is needed for NH staff.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are widely used among general practitioners (GP) and hospital doctors alike as a first-line agent for the management of various approved conditions. However, PPIs do have an established side-effect profile that can be over looked when prescribing these agents outside of their Food Drug Administration (FDA) indications. AIMS: The aim of this audit is to establish that PPIs are often prescribed without any clear documented indication as to why, particularly in the elderly population, despite multiple previous studies conducted which showed an over-use of these medicines. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study of the patients admitted to an acute hospital in Ireland in February 2018. A cohort of patient charts were pulled from medical records and reviewed. Medical notes, GP letters, discharge summaries and prescriptions were reviewed in order to establish the primary indication for PPI prescription. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-four (n = 174) inpatient records were randomly assessed during the audit. Of these patients, 85 of them were taking PPIs regularly. 54.7% (n = 46) were prescribed a PPI without any documented indication. 46.4% (n = 39) of these patients were > 75 years of age. 54.7% (n = 46) of patients were prescribed esomeprazole. The commonest indication for prescribing PPIs was to reduce the risk of gastric ulceration associated with NSAID use, which was 68.4% (n = 26) of those who were prescribed a PPI in accordance with guidelines. CONCLUSION: Irrational prescribing of PPIs continues both in hospital and in general practise. It is imperative that the side-effects of these medicines are weighed against the benefit and cost effectiveness, especially in the elderly population where polypharmacy remains a substantial concern.
