Implementation of Hospital Mortality Reviews: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to give an overview of the published literature on the implementation of mortality reviews in hospital settings. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, and Web of Science databases up to August 2022 for studies describing implementation or results of implementation of hospital mortality reviews published in English or German. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Two independent reviewers screened the title/abstract and the full text of potentially relevant records and extracted data using a standardized form. We synthesized and integrated quantitative and qualitative findings narratively following a convergent segregated mixed methods review approach. RESULTS: From the 884 studies screened, 18 publications met all inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Observed mortality rates reported in 10 publications ranged from 0.4% to 7.8%. In 10 publications, mortality reviews were implemented as a multistep process. In 7 publications, structured mortality review meetings were implemented. Key aspects of success in developing and implementing mortality reviews in hospitals were involvement of multiple stakeholders, providing enough resources for included staff, and constant monitoring and adaption of the processes. CONCLUSIONS: Although awareness of hospital mortality reviews has increased over the last decades, published research in this area is still rare. Our results may inform hospitals considering development and implementation of mortality reviews by providing key aspects and lessons learned from existing implementation experiences.

Self-reported health literacy and medication adherence in older adults: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To give an overview over the associations between self-reported health literacy and medication adherence in older adults. DESIGN: A systematic literature review of quantitative studies published in English and German. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos and LIVIVO were searched. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Included studies had to examine the associations between self-reported health literacy and medication adherence in the elderly (samples including ≥66% of ≥60 years old) and had to use a quantitative methodology and had to be written in English or German. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: All studies were screened for inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers. A narrative synthesis was applied to analyse all included studies thematically. Quality assessment was conducted using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. RESULTS: We found 2313 studies, of which nine publications from eight studies were included in this review. Five studies reported a majority of participants with limited health literacy, one study reported a majority of participants with adequate health literacy, and three publications from two studies only reported mean levels of health literacy. Eight publications from seven studies used self-reports to measure medication adherence, while one study used the medication possession ratio. Overall, six publications from five studies reported significantly positive associations between health literacy and medication adherence while two studies reported positive but non-significant associations between both constructs and one study reported mixed results. CONCLUSION: In this review, associations between self-reported health literacy and medication adherence are rather consistent, indicating positive associations between both constructs in older adults. However, concepts and measures of health literacy and medication adherence applied in the included studies still show a noteworthy amount of heterogeneity (eg, different use of cutoffs). These results reveal the need for more differentiated research in this area. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019141028.

Pharmaceutical management of elderly high-risk patients in perioperative settings (PHAROS): protocol of a pilot sequential intervention study.

INTRODUCTION: With increasing age, the risk of complications after surgery rises in elderly patients. Furthermore, the prevalence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy rises with age, making this elderly population especially vulnerable for drug-related problems and posing an additional risk for postoperative complications. Still, only few studies have concentrated on investigating how medication safety can be improved in these patients. The aim of this pilot study is to examine the impact of a comprehensive intervention (interprofessional systematic medication therapy management) on medication appropriateness in elderly polymedicated, multimorbid patients during hospital stay for elective surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This pilot study will include a total number of 140 patients. Surgical high-risk patients ≥65 years taking more than five chronic systemic drugs will be recruited consecutively for 9 months in the control group capturing usual care regarding medication history and in-hospital medication therapy management without any study intervention. Recruitment of the intervention group will be conducted for another 9 months. The intervention consists of the following components: an additional medication history by a hospital pharmacist before admission, a subsequent medication review, optimisation of the long-term medication and recommendations to the patient's general practitioner. A follow-up will be performed 3 months after surgery. As the primary study outcome, medication appropriateness will be measured using the Medication Appropriateness Index.Secondary outcomes are postoperative complications, incidence and frequency of adverse drug reactions and potentially inappropriate medication in the elderly, satisfaction with inpatient and outpatient care, medication reconciliation and health-related quality of life. Multivariable analyses will be used to analyse all quantitative research questions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained by the medical ethics committee of the Medical Chamber of Hamburg (study ID: PV5754). Data will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study is registered at www.drks.de: DRKS00014621.