National trends in utilisation of glucose lowering medicines by older people with diabetes in long-term care facilities.

AIMS: To examine national trends in glucose lowering medicine (GLM) use among older people with diabetes in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) during 2009-2019. METHODS: A repeated cross-sectional study of individuals ≥65 years with diabetes in Australian LTCFs (n = 140,322) was conducted. Annual age-sex standardised prevalence of GLM use and number of defined daily doses (DDDs)/1000 resident-days were estimated. Multivariable Poisson or Negative binomial regression models were used to estimate adjusted rate ratios (aRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Prevalence of GLM use remained steady between 2009 (63.9%, 95 %CI 63.3-64.4) and 2019 (64.3%, 95 %CI 63.9-64.8) (aRR 1.00, 95 %CI 1.00-1.00). The percentage of residents receiving metformin increased from 36.0% (95 %CI 35.3-36.7) to 43.5% (95 %CI 42.9-44.1) (aRR 1.01, 95 %CI 1.01-1.01). Insulin use also increased from 21.5% (95 %CI 21.0-22.0) to 27.0% (95 %CI 26.5-27.5) (aRR 1.02, 95 %CI 1.02-1.02). Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor use increased from 1.0% (95 %CI 0.9-1.1) to 21.1% (95 %CI 20.7-21.5) (aRR 1.24, 95 %CI 1.24-1.25), while sulfonylurea use decreased from 34.4% (95 %CI 33.8-35.1) to 19.3% (95 %CI 18.9-19.7) (aRR 0.93, 95 %CI 0.93-0.94). Similar trends were observed in DDDs/1000 resident days. CONCLUSIONS: The increasing use of insulin and ongoing use of sulfonylureas suggests a need to implement evidence-based strategies to optimise diabetes care in LTCFs.

Simplifying medication regimens for residents of aged care facilities: Pharmacist and physician use of a structured five-step medication simplification tool.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacist-led medication regimen simplification using a structured approach can reduce unnecessary medication regimen complexity in residential aged care facilities (RACFs), but no studies have investigated simplification by different health professionals, nor the extent to which simplification is recommended during comprehensive medication reviews. OBJECTIVES: To compare medication regimen simplification opportunities identified by pharmacists, general medical practitioners (GPs), and geriatricians and to determine if pharmacists identified simplification opportunities during routinely conducted comprehensive medication reviews in RACFs for these same residents. METHODS: Three pharmacists, three GPs and three geriatricians independently applied the Medication Regimen Simplification Guide for Residential Aged CarE (MRS GRACE) to medication data for 83 residents taking medications at least twice daily. Interrater agreement was calculated using Fleiss's kappa. Pharmacist medication review reports for the same 83 residents were then examined to identify if the pharmacists conducting these reviews had recommended any of the simplification strategies. RESULTS: Overall, 77 residents (92.8 %) taking medications at least twice daily could have their medication regimen simplified by at least one health professional. Pharmacists independently simplified 53.0-77.1 % of medication regimens (Κ = 0.60, 95%CI 0.46-0.75, indicating substantial agreement), while GPs simplified 74.7-89.2 % (Κ = 0.44, 95%CI 0.24-0.64, moderate agreement) and geriatricians simplified 41.0-66.3 % (Κ = 0.30, 95%CI 0.16-0.44, fair agreement). No simplification recommendations were included in the reports previously prepared by pharmacists as part of the comprehensive medication reviews undertaken for these residents. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists, GPs, and geriatricians can all identify medication regimen simplification opportunities, although these opportunities differ within and between professional groups. Although opportunities to simplify medication regimens during comprehensive medication reviews exist, simplification is not currently routinely recommended by pharmacists performing these reviews in Australian RACFs.

National Trends in Antidepressant Use in Australian Residential Aged Care Facilities (2006-2019).

OBJECTIVES: Antipsychotics have been the focus of reforms for improving the appropriateness of psychotropic medicine use in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Comprehensive evaluation of antidepressant use in RACFs is required to inform policy and practice initiatives targeting psychotropic medicines. This study examined national trends in antidepressant use among older people living in RACFs from 2006 to 2019. DESIGN: National repeated cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 65 to 105 years who were permanent, long-term (≥100 days) residents of Australian RACFs between January 2006 and December 2019 were included. METHODS: Annual age- and sex-adjusted antidepressant prevalence rates and defined daily doses (DDDs) supplied per 1000 resident-days from 2006 to 2019 were determined. Age- and sex-adjusted prevalence rate ratios (aRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Poisson and negative binomial regression models. RESULTS: A total of 779,659 residents of 3371 RACFs were included (786,227,380 resident-days). Overall, antidepressant use increased from 46.1% (95% CI, 45.9-46.4) in 2006 to 58.5% (95% CI, 58.3-58.8) of residents in 2019 (aRR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.02-1.02). Mirtazapine use increased from 8.4% (95% CI, 8.2-8.5) to 20.9% (95% CI, 20.7-21.1) from 2006 to 2019 (aRR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.07-1.07). Antidepressant use increased from 350.3 (95% CI, 347.6-353.1) to 506.0 (95% CI, 502.8-509.3) DDDs/1000 resident-days (aRR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.03-1.03), with mirtazapine utilization increasing by 6% annually (aRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.06-1.06). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This nationwide study identified a substantial increase in antidepressant use among residents of Australian RACFs, largely driven by mirtazapine. With nearly 3 in every 5 residents treated with an antidepressant in 2019, findings highlight potential off-label use and suggest that interventions to optimize care are urgently needed.

Process Evaluation of the SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm Care Residents (SIMPLER) Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial: A Mixed Methods Study.

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.

Simplifying Medication Regimens for People Receiving Community-Based Home Care Services: Outcomes of a Non-Randomized Pilot and Feasibility Study.

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.

Reducing the Burden of Complex Medication Regimens: SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm care Residents (SIMPLER) Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the application of a structured process to consolidate the number of medication administration times for residents of aged care facilities. DESIGN: A nonblinded, matched-pair, cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Permanent residents who were English-speaking and taking at least 1 regular medication, recruited from 8 South Australian residential aged care facilities (RACFs). METHODS: The intervention involved a clinical pharmacist applying a validated 5-step tool to identify opportunities to reduce medication complexity (eg, by administering medications at the same time or through use of longer-acting or combination formulations). Residents in the comparison group received routine care. The primary outcome at 4-month follow-up was the number of administration times per day for medications charted regularly. Resident satisfaction and quality of life were secondary outcomes. Harms included falls, medication incidents, hospitalizations, and mortality. The association between the intervention and primary outcome was estimated using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Overall, 99 residents participated in the intervention arm and 143 in the comparison arm. At baseline, the mean resident age was 86 years, 74% were female, and medications were taken an average of 4 times daily. Medication simplification was possible for 62 (65%) residents in the intervention arm, with 57 (62%) of 92 simplification recommendations implemented at follow-up. The mean number of administration times at follow-up was reduced in the intervention arm in comparison to usual care (-0.36, 95% confidence interval -0.63 to -0.09, P = .01). No significant changes in secondary outcomes or harms were observed. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: One-off application of a structured tool to reduce regimen complexity is a low-risk intervention to reduce the burden of medication administration in RACFs and may enable staff to shift time to other resident care activities.