Medicines stewardship.

Medicines stewardship refers to coordinated strategies and interventions to optimise medicines use, usually within a specific therapeutic area. Medicines stewardship programs can reduce variations in practice and improve patient outcomes. Therapeutic domains for medicines stewardship are chosen to address frequently used drug classes associated with a high risk of adverse outcomes. Some examples include antimicrobial, opioid analgesic, anticoagulation and psychotropic stewardship. Common elements of successful stewardship programs include multidisciplinary leadership, stakeholder engagement, tailored communication strategies, behavioural changes, implementation science methodologies, and ongoing program monitoring, evaluation and reporting. Medicines stewardship is a continual quality improvement process that requires ongoing support and resources, as well as clinician and consumer engagement, to remain sustainable. It is critical for hospital-based medicines stewardship programs to consider impacts on care in the community when making and communicating changes to patient therapy. This ensures that stewardship efforts are sustained across transitions of care.

A novel, multidomain, primary care nurse-led and mHealth-assisted intervention for dementia risk reduction in middle-aged adults (HAPPI MIND): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Middle-aged multidomain risk reduction interventions targeting modifiable risk factors for dementia may delay or prevent a third of dementia cases in later life. We describe the protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT), HAPPI MIND (Holistic Approach in Primary care for PreventIng Memory Impairment aNd Dementia). HAPPI MIND will evaluate the efficacy of a multidomain, nurse-led, mHealth supported intervention for assessing dementia risk and reducing associated risk factors in middle-aged adults in the Australian primary care setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: General practice clinics (n≥26) across Victoria and New South Wales, Australia, will be recruited and randomised. Practice nurses will be trained to implement the HAPPI MIND intervention or a brief intervention. Patients of participating practices aged 45-65 years with ≥2 potential dementia risk factors will be identified and recruited (approximately 15 patients/clinic). Brief intervention participants receive a personalised report outlining their risk factors for dementia based on Australian National University Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI) scores, education booklet and referral to their general practitioner as appropriate. HAPPI MIND participants receive the brief intervention as well as six individualised dementia risk reduction sessions with a nurse trained in motivational interviewing and principles of behaviour change, a personalised risk reduction action plan and access to the purpose-built HAPPI MIND smartphone app for risk factor self-management. Follow-up data collection will occur at 12, 24 and 36 months. Primary outcome is ANU-ADRI score change at 12 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes include change in cognition, quality of life and individual risk factors of dementia. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Project approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: 28273). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at healthcare conferences. If effective in reducing dementia risk, the HAPPI MIND intervention could be integrated into primary care, scaled up nationally and sustained over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621001168842.

Accuracy of medication labels on community pharmacy-prepared dose administration aids: An observational study.

Background: Hospital prescribers often use the labels on multicompartment compliance aids or monitored dosage systems, known in Australia as dose administration aids (DAAs), as a trusted source of information about patients' medication regimens taken in the community. Aim: The primary aim was to explore the prevalence and nature of labelling incidents on community pharmacy-prepared DAAs. Methods: A convenience sample of 100 adult patients admitted to a metropolitan teaching hospital who used a community pharmacy-prepared DAA at home was recruited. Patients were excluded if their DAAs were not brought to hospital. As part of usual care, a pharmacist took a best possible medication history (BPMH) using multiple information sources. This 'gold standard' BPMH was compared to the regimen listed on the DAA summary label and the DAA contents. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients whose DAA summary label(s) had one or more incidents for DAA packed medications. DAA label incident was defined as incorrect, missing or illegible/ambiguous medication name, strength, dose or dose-form when compared to the BPMH and DAA contents. Secondary outcomes were compliance with best-practice guidelines for labelling DAAs; and percentage of patients with a DAA packing error. Results: The 100 patients used 110 DAAs, packed by 75 community pharmacies. Four (4.0%) patients had no medication summary label on their DAAs. Of the 96 patients whose DAA(s) had a summary label, 82 (85.4%) had one or more summary label incidents. The most prevalent incidents were 'illegible, ambiguous or missing medication details', 'truncated medication name' and 'omission of a medication'. The most prevalent guideline non-compliance was not including generic medication names (68% DAA-packed medications). Two DAA packing errors were identified. Conclusion: A high prevalence of DAA labelling incidents was identified. Improved DAA labelling software functionality, more robust pharmacy procedures and pharmacy staff education are required.

Completeness and accuracy of adverse drug reaction documentation in electronic medical records at a tertiary care hospital in Australia.

Background: A large proportion of patients presenting to hospitals have experienced a previous adverse drug reaction (ADR). Electronic medical records (EMRs) present an opportunity to accurately document ADRs and alert clinicians against inadvertent rechallenge where there is a pre-existing reaction. However, EMR systems are imperfect and rely on the accuracy of the data entered. Objective: To ascertain the completeness of ADR documentation and the accuracy of the classification of ADRs as allergy versus intolerance in the EMR at a major metropolitan hospital in Australia. Method: Cross-sectional audit of the ADR field of the EMR for a sample of patients on four different wards over 3 weeks to ascertain the completeness of ADR documentation and the accuracy of classification of ADRs. Results: Of the 264 patients assessed, 102 (38.6%) had a total of 210 ADRs documented in the EMR. Of these, 105 (50%) were considered to have complete documentation; 63/210 (30.0%) were missing a reaction description and 88/210 (41.9%) were missing severity information. For those ADRs with a reaction description (n = 147), 97 (66.0%) were considered to be appropriately classified as allergy or intolerance. Conclusion: Incomplete and inaccurate ADR documentation was common. These findings highlight a need for optimising ADR documentation to improve appropriate medication use in hospital. Implications: Improved EMR design and education of healthcare workers on the importance of complete and accurate documentation of reactions are needed to improve completeness and accuracy of ADR classification.

Accuracy of medication histories derived from an Australian cloud-based repository of prescribed and dispensed medication records.

BACKGROUND: Obtaining accurate medication histories at transitions of care is challenging, but important for patient safety. Prescription exchange services (PES) securely transfer electronic prescription and dispensing records between prescribers and pharmacies, which is potentially useful data for determining medication histories. AIM: To evaluate the accuracy of PES-derived medication histories. METHODS: Prospective observational study, at two Australian tertiary-referral health services. A convenience sample of adult inpatients was recruited. The main outcome measure was: proportion of patients with ≥1 errors in their PES-derived pre-admission medication histories, compared with gold-standard best-possible medication histories, including prescribed and non-prescribed medications, obtained by pharmacists using multiple sources including patient/carer interview. RESULTS: Of 154 patients (median age 76 years; interquartile range (IQR) 64-84 years; median 10.0 pre-admission medications; IQR 6.0-14.0), 153 (99.4%) had ≥1 errors in their PES-derived medication history (median 6.0 errors per patient; IQR 4.0-9.0). Excluding when-required medications, 146 (94.8%) patients had >1 errors (median 4.0 errors per patient; IQR 2.0-6.0). Omission was the most common error, affecting 549 (33.3%) of 1648 current medications (median 3.0; IQR 1.0-5.0 per patient); 396 (72.1%) omissions were over-the-counter medicines. Dose-regimen errors affected 276 (25.1%) of 1099 current medications captured in PES-derived medication histories (median 1.0 error per patient; IQR 0.0-3.0). Commission errors (medications in PES-derived histories that were not current) affected 224 (16.9%) of 1323 medications (median 1.0 error per patient; IQR 1.0-2.0). CONCLUSIONS: Medication histories derived solely from a cloud-based medication record repository had a high error rate compared with patients' actual medication use. Like all medication history sources, data from cloud-based repositories need to be verified with additional sources including the patient and/or their carer.

Evaluation of a post-discharge pharmacist opioid review following total knee arthroplasty: a pre- and post-intervention cohort study.

BACKGROUND: More than 70% of patients continue to use opioid medications 3-weeks following total knee arthroplasty. Post-discharge pharmacist reviews improve medication management, however it's effect on opioid usage is not known. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of post-discharge pharmacist review on opioid use following a total knee arthroplasty. METHOD: A pilot, cohort pre- and post-intervention study was undertaken on patients who had undergone a total knee arthroplasty and were supplied an opioid upon discharge from hospital. During the intervention, patients were contacted via telephone by a pharmacist approximately five days post-discharge to review analgesic usage, provide education and advice and communicate an opioid management plan to their general practitioner. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients taking opioids 3-weeks post-discharge. Secondary endpoints included: percentage of patients obtaining an opioid refill; patient satisfaction with opioid supply and the pharmacist review. RESULTS: Pre- and post-intervention, 63 and 44 patients were included, respectively. The percentage of patients taking opioids 3-weeks post-discharge declined from 74.6 to 29.6% (p < 0.001) and the percentage requiring an opioid refill from their general practitioner declined from 71.4 to 36.4% (p < 0.001). More patients were satisfied with opioid supply during the intervention period (79.5% cf. 47.6%, p = 0.001). Twenty-eight (63.6%) patients could recall the post-discharge pharmacist review, and all were either satisfied or extremely satisfied with the review. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist-delivered post-discharge analgesia review reduced the percentage of patients taking opioids 3-weeks post-discharge following a total knee arthroplasty. This intervention has the potential to provide a smoother transition of care for patients supplied with opioids at the time of hospital discharge.

Paracetamol dosing in hospital and on discharge for older people who are frail or have low body weight.

AIMS: To describe paracetamol dosing and liver function test (LFT) monitoring in older hospital inpatients who are frail or have low body weight. METHODS: Retrospective observational study, at a 790-bed metropolitan public health service in Australia. Patients aged ≥70 years, with body weight <50 kg or frailty index based on laboratory data (FI-Lab) score ≥0.3, who were administered paracetamol during an admission with length-of-stay >72 hours, were included. Data were extracted from electronic medical records. Paracetamol doses administered in hospital, and doses prescribed on discharge, were compared against consensus guidelines that recommended ≤60 mg/kg/d for older people weighing <50 kg, and ≤3000 mg/d for frail older people. RESULTS: In total, 240 admissions (n = 229 patients, mean age 84.7 years) were analysed. During 150 (62.5%) admissions, higher than recommended paracetamol doses were prescribed. On 138 (57.5%) occasions, patients were prescribed paracetamol on discharge, and 112/138 (81.2%) doses were higher than recommended. Most discharge prescriptions (97/138, 70.3%) were for regular administration. The median daily dose on discharge for patients <50 kg was 83.7 mg/kg (interquartile range 73.6-90.9 mg/kg). For frail patients ≥50 kg, the median daily discharge dose was 3990 mg (interquartile range 3000-4000 mg). LFTs were measured in hospital for 151/200 (75.5%) and 93/166 (56.0%) patients who received paracetamol for >48 hours and >5 days, respectively. CONCLUSION: Majority of paracetamol doses prescribed for frail or low-weight older patients in hospital and on discharge were higher than recommended in consensus guidelines. LFTs were not measured for 44% patients who received paracetamol regularly for >5 days. Further studies are needed to explore long-term outcomes of this practice.

Coaching ward pharmacists in antimicrobial stewardship: A pilot study.

Background: Ward pharmacists are well-positioned to enhance the activities of hospital antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs by reviewing the appropriateness of antimicrobials and making recommendations to prescribers. However, recent studies have identified gaps in ward pharmacists' AMS practice, knowledge, skills, and confidence which suggests education and training programs are needed. Objectives: To describe, for the first time, an interactive educational activity - coaching in AMS - targeted at ward pharmacists and explore their perceptions of coaching as a mode of delivering education to improve AMS knowledge, skills, confidence, and practice. A secondary objective was to describe the type, frequency, and acceptance of AMS recommendations made by coached pharmacists. Methods: This was a descriptive pilot study with a qualitative evaluation of pharmacists' perceptions and experiences of coaching. AMS coaching was delivered over 2 months in 2019 to pharmacists providing clinical pharmacy services to general medical and surgical wards. A focus group was conducted one month after the coaching period to elicit pharmacists' perceptions of coaching as a mode of delivering AMS education and how it impacted their AMS knowledge, skills, confidence, and practice. AMS recommendations made by coached pharmacists were prospectively recorded, and the prescriber acceptance rate was determined. Results: Ward pharmacists reported positive experiences with AMS coaching and believed it helped them identify a range of recommendations to improve antimicrobial prescribing and increased their confidence to communicate recommendations to prescribers. Workload issues were identified as the main barrier to implementation. Suggestions were provided to improve coaching implementation feasibility. During coaching, 162 AMS recommendations were identified for a range of antimicrobials, and 69% (113/162) were accepted and implemented. Conclusions: Ward pharmacists believed coaching improved their AMS knowledge, skills, confidence, and practice, including their confidence to discuss recommendations with prescribers. These results can assist with the design and evaluation of future hospital-based AMS educational initiatives.

Exposure to hand sanitisers and other cleaning products in Victoria, Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, there was increased promotion and use of topical antiseptics (especially hand sanitisers) and cleaning products to reduce transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This study describes unintentional exposures (oral or ocular) to these substances by children during the first year (2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the previous year (2019). METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of unintentional exposures reported to the Victorian Poisons Information Centre for the period 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. Substances included topical antiseptics (including hand sanitisers), bleach, multipurpose cleaners, disinfectants and high-percentage ethanol products. We analysed data for two age groups; under 5 years and 5 to 14 years. RESULTS: Oral exposures (ingestion or buccal) to topical antiseptics increased from 435 in 2019 to 882 in 2020 in the under 5 age group, with peak call numbers in 2020 coinciding with peaks in active COVID-19 daily case numbers. Oral exposures in older children (5-14 years) were lower (23 and 77 in 2019 and 2020, respectively). No children had moderate or severe symptoms at the time of the call to the Poisons Centre. Ocular exposures to topical antiseptics more than doubled from 2019 to 2020 (from 20 to 53 among children under 5 years, and 8 to 18 in older children). The majority of children with ocular exposure presented with mild symptoms; one had moderate symptoms. Changes in exposures to disinfectants, bleach and cleaners were smaller and not consistent with peaks in active COVID-19 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Unintentional oral exposures to topical disinfectants (mainly hand sanitiser) by young children increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and were more prevalent during periods of increased COVID-19 cases. While there were no cases of severe harm identified, the high number of exposures suggests that appropriate use and storage of hand sanitisers should be promoted.

Exploring the practice, confidence and educational needs of hospital pharmacists in reviewing antimicrobial prescribing: a cross-sectional, nationwide survey.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs are usually limited in resources and scope. Therefore, wider engagement of hospital pharmacists in reviewing antimicrobial orders is necessary to ensure appropriate prescribing. We assessed hospital pharmacists' self-reported practice and confidence in reviewing antimicrobial prescribing, and their knowledge in making AMS interventions. METHODS: We conducted an Australia-wide, cross-sectional survey in October 2017. A link to the online survey was emailed to hospital pharmacists via the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia. Factors associated with higher knowledge scores were explored using linear regression models. RESULTS: There were 439 respondents, of whom 272 (61.7%) were from metropolitan public hospitals. Pharmacists were more likely to assess the appropriateness of intravenous, broad-spectrum or restricted antibiotics than narrow-spectrum, oral antibiotics within 24-72 h of prescription; p < 0.001. Fifty percent or fewer respondents were confident in identifying AMS interventions related to dose optimization based on infection-specific factors, bug-drug mismatch, and inappropriate lack of spectra of antimicrobial activity. The median knowledge score (correct answers to knowledge questions) was 6 out of 9 (interquartile range, 5-7); key gaps were noted in antimicrobials' anaerobic spectrum, beta-lactam allergy assessment and dosing in immunocompromised patients. Clinical practice in inpatient areas, registration for 3-5 years and receipt of recent AMS education were associated with higher knowledge scores. More interactive modes of education delivery were preferred over didactic modes; p ≤ 0.01. CONCLUSION: Gaps in practice, confidence and knowledge among hospital pharmacists were identified that could inform the design of educational strategies to help improve antimicrobial prescribing in Australian hospitals.

Wastage of medications supplied by hospitals to facilitate continuity of care when patients are discharged to residential care facilities in Victoria, Australia: An observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore wastage of hospital-supplied medications for patients discharged to residential care facilities (RCFs). METHODS: Telephone interviews with staff at 52 RCFs and nine community pharmacies after patients were discharged from three hospitals in metropolitan Victoria, Australia, with medication supplied in original packs. RESULTS: Hospital-supplied medication was used by most RCFs, for a median of 48 hours, while waiting for community pharmacies to deliver medications packed in the RCFs' preferred dose administration aid system (unit-dose or multi-dose blister packs or sachets). All RCFs reported sending unused hospital-supplied medications to their community pharmacy. Six of the nine community pharmacies (managing 83% patients) indicated they did not reuse hospital-supplied medications, with the exception of select difficult-to-source medications. CONCLUSION: There was significant wastage of hospital-supplied discharge medications. Changes to the way hospital discharge medications are funded and quantities supplied are needed to ensure continuity of medication administration while minimising financial and environmental impacts of medication wastage.

Evaluation of intravenous to oral antimicrobial switch at a hospital with a tightly regulated antimicrobial stewardship program.

Timely intravenous (IV) to oral antimicrobial switch (IV-oral-switch) is a key antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) strategy. We aimed to explore concordance with IV-oral-switch guidelines in the context of a long-standing, tightly regulated AMS program. Data was retrospectively collected for 107 adult general medical and surgical patients in an Australian hospital. Median duration of IV antimicrobial courses before switching to oral therapy was 3 days (interquartile range [IQR] 2.25-5.00). Timely IV-oral-switch occurred in 57% (n = 61) of patients. The median delay to switching was 0 days (IQR 0 to 1.25). In most courses (92/106, 86.8%), the choice of oral alternative after switching was appropriate. In 45% (47/105) of courses, total duration of therapy (IV plus oral) exceeded the recommended duration by >1.0 day. Excessive IV antimicrobial duration was uncommon at a hospital with a tightly regulated AMS program. Total duration of therapy was identified as an AMS target for improvement.

Pharmacist-Facilitated Interactive E-Learning for Patients Newly Initiated on Warfarin: A Randomised Controlled Study.

It is not known whether electronic-learning (e-learning) is effective for educating hospital inpatients about complex medications such as warfarin. This prospective randomised controlled study compared pharmacist-facilitated e-learning with standard pharmacist-delivered face-to-face education on patients' or their unpaid carers' knowledge of warfarin and satisfaction with warfarin education as well as the time that was spent by pharmacists in delivering warfarin education. Adult English-speaking patients (or their carers) who had been prescribed warfarin were randomised to receive standard pharmacist face-to-face education (control) or an e-learning module on a tablet device facilitated by a pharmacist (intervention). All of the participants received written warfarin information and were presented with the opportunity to ask any questions that they may have had to a pharmacist. Fifty-four participants completed the study (27 per group). The participants who received e-learning had median correct Oral Anticoagulation Knowledge (OAK) test scores of 85% compared to 80% for standard education (p = 0.14). The participants in both groups were satisfied with the information that they received. There was a trend towards pharmacists spending less time on warfarin education for the e-learning group than in the standard education group (25.5 vs. 33 min, respectively, p = 0.05). Education delivered via pharmacist-facilitated e-learning was non-inferior in terms of patient or carer warfarin knowledge compared to standard pharmacist-delivered education.

Interventions for improving medication-taking ability and adherence in older adults prescribed multiple medications.

BACKGROUND: Older people taking multiple medications represent a large and growing proportion of the population. Managing multiple medications can be challenging, and this is especially the case for older people, who have higher rates of comorbidity and physical and cognitive impairment than younger adults. Good medication-taking ability and medication adherence are necessary to ensure safe and effective use of medications. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve medication-taking ability and/or medication adherence in older community-dwelling adults prescribed multiple long-term medications. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from inception until June 2019. We also searched grey literature, online trial registries, and reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs. Eligible studies tested interventions aimed at improving medication-taking ability and/or medication adherence among people aged ≥ 65 years (or of mean/median age > 65 years), living in the community or being discharged from hospital back into the community, and taking four or more regular prescription medications (or with group mean/median of more than four medications). Interventions targeting carers of older people who met these criteria were also included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts and full texts of eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We conducted meta-analyses when possible and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect, risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Narrative synthesis was performed when meta-analysis was not possible. We assessed overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes were medication-taking ability and medication adherence. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life (HRQoL), emergency department (ED)/hospital admissions, and mortality. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 50 studies (14,269 participants) comprising 40 RCTs, six cluster-RCTs, and four quasi-RCTs. All included studies evaluated interventions versus usual care; six studies also reported a comparison between two interventions as part of a three-arm RCT design. Interventions were grouped on the basis of their educational and/or behavioural components: 14 involved educational components only, 7 used behavioural strategies only, and 29 provided mixed educational and behavioural interventions. Overall, our confidence in results regarding the effectiveness of interventions was low to very low due to a high degree of heterogeneity of included studies and high or unclear risk of bias across multiple domains in most studies. Five studies evaluated interventions for improving medication-taking ability, and 48 evaluated interventions for improving medication adherence (three studies evaluated both outcomes). No studies involved educational or behavioural interventions alone for improving medication-taking ability. Low-quality evidence from five studies, each using a different measure of medication-taking ability, meant that we were unable to determine the effects of mixed interventions on medication-taking ability. Low-quality evidence suggests that behavioural only interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.38; 4 studies) and mixed interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.37; 12 studies) may increase the proportions of people who are adherent compared with usual care. We could not include in the meta-analysis results from two studies involving mixed interventions: one had a positive effect on adherence, and the other had little or no effect. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of educational only interventions (5 studies) on the proportions of people who are adherent. Low-quality evidence suggests that educational only interventions (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.43; 5 studies) and mixed interventions (SMD 0.47, 95% CI -0.08 to 1.02; 7 studies) may have little or no impact on medication adherence assessed through continuous measures of adherence. We excluded 10 studies (4 educational only and 6 mixed interventions) from the meta-analysis including four studies with unclear or no available results. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of behavioural only interventions (3 studies) on medication adherence when assessed through continuous outcomes. Low-quality evidence suggests that mixed interventions may reduce the number of ED/hospital admissions (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; 11 studies) compared with usual care, although results from six further studies that we were unable to include in meta-analyses indicate that the intervention may have a smaller, or even no, effect on these outcomes. Similarly, low-quality evidence suggests that mixed interventions may lead to little or no change in HRQoL (7 studies), and very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects on mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.30; 7 studies). Moderate-quality evidence shows that educational interventions alone probably have little or no effect on HRQoL (6 studies) or on ED/hospital admissions (4 studies) when compared with usual care. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of behavioural interventions on HRQoL (1 study) or on ED/hospital admissions (2 studies). We identified no studies evaluating effects of educational or behavioural interventions alone on mortality. Six studies reported a comparison between two interventions; however due to the limited number of studies assessing the same types of interventions and comparisons, we are unable to draw firm conclusions for any outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Behavioural only or mixed educational and behavioural interventions may improve the proportion of people who satisfactorily adhere to their prescribed medications, but we are uncertain of the effects of educational only interventions. No type of intervention was found to improve adherence when it was measured as a continuous variable, with educational only and mixed interventions having little or no impact and evidence of insufficient quality to determine the effects of behavioural only interventions. We were unable to determine the impact of interventions on medication-taking ability. The quality of evidence for these findings is low due to heterogeneity and methodological limitations of studies included in the review. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to investigate the effects of interventions for improving medication-taking ability and medication adherence in older adults prescribed multiple medications.

Evaluation of communication to general practitioners when opioid-naïve post-surgical patients are discharged from hospital on opioids.

BACKGROUND: To address the opioid crisis, much work has focused on minimizing opioid supply to surgical patients upon hospital discharge. Research is limited regarding handover to primary care providers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the communication of post-operative opioid prescribing information provided by hospitals to general practitioners (GPs). METHODS: This study comprised two components. First, a retrospective audit of discharge summaries for opioid-naïve surgical patients supplied with an opioid on discharge was conducted to evaluate accuracy of opioid documentation and presence of an opioid management plan. Second, a survey was distributed to GPs to seek their opinions regarding adequacy of communication about hospital-initiated opioids in discharge summaries, challenges experienced in opioid management and suggestions for improvement. RESULTS: Discharge summaries for 285 patients were audited. Twenty-seven (9.5%) patients had no discharge summary completed. Of the remaining 258, 63 (24.4%) summaries had at least one discrepancy between the opioid(s) listed and the opioid(s) dispensed. Only 33 (12.8%) summaries contained an opioid management plan. From 57 GP-completed surveys, 41 (71.9%) GPs rarely or never received an opioid management plan from hospital surgical units and 34 (59.7%) were dissatisfied/very dissatisfied with information provided about opioid supply and management. Qualitative responses highlighted difficulties GPs experience managing opioid treatment for post-surgical patients after discharge, differing patient expectations and the need to improve communication at times of transition. CONCLUSION: When opioid-naive patients are discharged from hospital on opioids, communication from hospitals to GPs is poor. Future interventions should focus on strategies to improve this.

Opioid Use and Appropriateness of Supply After Total Knee or Hip Arthroplasty: An Australian Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Effective pain management after joint arthroplasty is essential for optimal participation in rehabilitation. However, this needs to be balanced with potential risks associated with opioid use and community exposure. The aim of this study was to evaluate opioid use and appropriateness of supply on discharge after total knee arthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty at a major Australian health service. METHODS: A prospective observational study was undertaken at an Australian 980-bed metropolitan health service. Patient interviews were conducted 3 weeks after hospital discharge to evaluate analgesic management and functional outcomes. The primary end point was the number of hospital-supplied opioid pills remaining 3 weeks postdischarge. Secondary end points included (1) factors associated with opioid use 3 weeks postdischarge, (2) opioid use in patients with poor functional outcomes, and (3) proportion of opioid naive patients who became chronic opioid users. RESULTS: One hundred forty patients were included, and 137 were supplied opioids on discharge. At 3 weeks postdischarge, the median number of opioid pills remaining was 0 (interquartile range 0 to 8). There were 77 patients (56.2%) still taking opioids; surgery type, opioid use before admission, and the number of "as required" doses used 24 hours before discharge were independent predictors of opioid continuation. Patients with poor functional outcomes were supplied with more opioids on discharge, often not satisfied with the quantity supplied and more likely to be taking opioids 3 weeks postdischarge. There were 5 of 93 opioid naive patients (5.3%) who developed chronic opioid usage. DISCUSSION: More than half of the patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty were still using opioids at 3 weeks postdischarge. Most patients were not supplied with excessive quantities at discharge. Future research should focus on identifying patients at risk of prolonged opioid use and improving the transition of these patients into the community. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II-Prognostic study = prospective observational study.

Deprescribing potentially inappropriate medications in memory clinic patients (DePIMM): A feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Medication-related problems and inappropriate medication use are prevalent among people attending memory clinics. There have been no deprescribing intervention studies in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of a pharmacist-led interdisciplinary deprescribing intervention study in a memory clinic. METHODS: A pre-post-intervention study conducted at an outpatient memory clinic of an Australian tertiary care public hospital. Participants were English-speaking, community-dwelling patients identified as being at risk of a medication-related problem, or their carers. Participants received a medication review in their home from a consultant pharmacist who collaborated with the patient/carer, memory clinic, general practitioner and community pharmacist to develop a plan for optimising medication use. The primary outcome was feasibility, based on i) proportion of memory clinic patients eligible for the study, ii) proportion of eligible patients who consented, and iii) proportion of pharmacist-identified inappropriate/unnecessary medications that were deprescribed (reduced or ceased) at six months. RESULTS: One-third of memory clinic patient/carers were eligible (n = 82/238), 61% (n = 50/82) consented to participate. The median (IQR) age of participants who received the intervention (n = 46) was 80.5 (71.5-85.0) years and median (IQR) number of medications was 11 (8.0-13.3). Pharmacists recommended deprescribing 124 medications, and 53 (42.7%) had been ceased or dose-reduced at six months. CONCLUSION: It was feasible to recruit study participants and deliver a pharmacist-led interdisciplinary deprescribing intervention in this memory clinic setting. A larger, multi-centre study with longer follow-up is needed to confirm effectiveness and clinical outcomes.

Stakeholder perspectives on pharmacist involvement in a memory clinic to review patients' medication management and assist with deprescribing.

BACKGROUND: Memory clinics usually involve a team of health professionals who assess and review people with memory impairment. Memory clinic patients are typically older, have multiple comorbidities and potentially inappropriate polypharmacy. Pharmacists are not typically part of memory clinic teams. OBJECTIVE: To explore stakeholder perspectives on pharmacist involvement in a memory clinic to conduct medication reviews and assist with deprescribing potentially inappropriate/unnecessary medications. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of stakeholder perspectives within a deprescribing feasibility study. Patient/carer questionnaires were administered at 6-month follow-up. Fax-back surveys were sent to general practitioners (GPs) shortly after the pharmacist review. A focus group was conducted with memory clinic staff and semi-structured interviews with pharmacists at conclusion of the study. Focus group/interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Most patients/carers found the pharmacist medication review helpful (84%, 31/37) and believed it was important to have pharmacists in the memory clinic (92%, 36/39). Twenty-one (48%) GPs responded to the survey; most found the pharmacist reports useful for identifying inappropriate medication and providing deprescribing recommendations (86% and 81%, respectively), and 90% thought a pharmacist review should be part of the memory clinic service. Feedback from memory clinic staff and pharmacists was largely positive. Questions were raised by some staff about whether deprescribing fell within the clinic's scope of practice. Challenges associated with memory clinic-GP communication were highlighted. CONCLUSION: Patients, GPs and memory clinic staff were receptive to increased pharmacist involvement in the memory clinic. Stakeholder feedback will inform the development and delivery of pharmacist medication reviews and deprescribing in memory clinics.

Pharmacist-assisted electronic prescribing at the time of admission to an inpatient orthopaedic unit and its impact on medication errors: a pre- and postintervention study.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing and administration errors related to pre-admission medications are common amongst orthopaedic inpatients. Postprescribing medication reconciliation by clinical pharmacists after hospital admission prevents some but not all errors from reaching the patient. Involving pharmacists at the prescribing stage may more effectively prevent errors. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of pharmacist-assisted electronic prescribing at the time of hospital admission on medication errors in orthopaedic inpatients. METHODS: A pre- and postintervention study was conducted in the orthopaedic unit of a major metropolitan Australian hospital. During the 10-week intervention phase, a project pharmacist used electronic prescribing to assist with prescribing admission medications and postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, in consultation with orthopaedic medical officers. The primary endpoint was the number of medication errors per patient within 72 h of admission. Secondary endpoints included the number and consequence of adverse events (AEs) associated with admission medication errors and the time delay in administering VTE prophylaxis after elective surgery (number of hours after recommended postoperative dose-time). RESULTS: A total of 198 and 210 patients, pre- and postintervention, were evaluated, respectively. The median number of admission medication errors per patient declined from six pre-intervention to one postintervention (p < 0.01). A total of 17 AEs were related to admission medication errors during the pre-intervention period compared with 1 postintervention. There were 54 and 63 elective surgery patients pre- and postintervention, respectively. The median delay in administering VTE prophylaxis for these patients declined from 9 h pre-intervention to 2 h postintervention (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist-assisted electronic prescribing reduced the number of admission medication errors and associated AEs.