Drug use in Swedish nursing homes. Does the addition of a pharmacist transition coordinator improve evidence-based medication management and health outcomes in older adults moving from the hospital to a long-term care facility? Results of a randomized, controlled trial. Effects of a pharmacist's medication review in nursing homes. Randomised controlled trial. An outreach geriatric medication advisory service in residential aged care: a randomised controlled trial of case conferencing. Effect of computerized provider order entry with clinical decision support on adverse drug events in the long-term care setting. Outcomes of a randomized controlled trial of a clinical pharmacy intervention in 52 nursing homes. [Drug therapy in a nursing home; favorable effect of feedback by the pharmacist on family physician's prescribing behavior]. Clinical medication review by a pharmacist of elderly people living in care homes--randomised controlled trial.
To describe the overall drug use in Swedish nursing homes and to comment on the impact of regular multidisciplinary team interventions on the quantity of inappropriate medications.
                This randomised, controlled trial was carried out in a sample of 33 nursing homes, 15 experimental homes and 18 control homes, representing 5% of all Swedish nursing homes.
                The sample consisted of 1854 nursing home residents with an average age of 83 years. 70% of the residents were female and 42% had a documented diagnosis of dementia. An additional 5% had a psychotic disorder and 7% had a diagnosis of depression.
                Lists of each resident's prescriptions were collected 1 month before and 1 month after the 12-month intervention. Measures included the proportion of residents receiving any particular drug. The number of drugs classified by guidelines as inappropriate was also measured before and after the intervention period.
                The nursing home residents were prescribed on average 7.7 medications, the majority on a regular basis. The most frequently prescribed group of drugs was laxatives, followed by psychotropic agents and cardiovascular drugs. Some groups of drugs decreased in the intervention homes.
                Extensive and somewhat inappropriate drug use in Swedish nursing homes is a significant and serious problem. Careful monitoring is necessary to ensure well tolerated drug therapy in this frail population. Neither written information from the Medical Products Agency, nor the campaign in the pharmacies alone had an impact on drug use in Swedish nursing homes. Multidisciplinary team discussions contributed to improved drug use, but more research is needed to understand the mechanisms behind this finding. Poorly executed transfers of older patients from hospitals to long-term care facilities carry the risk of fragmentation of care, poor clinical outcomes, inappropriate use of emergency department services, and hospital readmission.
                This study was conducted to assess the impact of adding a pharmacist transition coordinator on evidence-based medication management and health outcomes in older adults undergoing first-time transfer from a hospital to a long-term care facility.
                This randomized, single-blind, controlled trial enrolled hospitalized older adults awaiting transfer to a long-term residential care facility for the first time. Patients were randomized either to receive the services of the pharmacist transition coordinator (intervention group) or to undergo the usual hospital discharge process (control group). The intervention included medication-management transfer summaries from hospitals, timely coordinated medication reviews by accredited community pharmacists, and case conferences with physicians and pharmacists. The primary outcome was the quality of prescribing, measured using the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI). Secondary outcomes were emergency department visits, hospital readmissions, adverse drug events, falls, worsening mobility, worsening behaviors, increased confusion, and worsening pain.
                One hundred ten older adults (67 women, 43 men; mean [SD] age, 82.7 [6.4] years) were recruited from 3 metropolitan hospitals and assigned to 85 metropolitan long-term care facilities. Fifty-six patients were randomized to the intervention group and 54 to the control group; 44 patients in each group were evaluable at 8-week follow-up. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between treatment groups, with the exception of the number of medications discontinued during hospitalization: a mean of 1.1 more drugs was discontinued in the control group compared with the intervention group (P = 0.011). The majority of patients (35 [62.5%] in the intervention group, 41 [76.0%] in the control group) changed physicians as part of the transition to a long-term care facility. At 8-week follow-up, there was no change in MAI from baseline in the intervention group, whereas it had worsened in the control group (mean [95% CI], 2.5 [1.4-3.7] vs 6.5 [3.9-9.1], respectively; P = 0.007). Patients who received the intervention and were alive at follow-up exhibited a significant protective effect of the intervention against worsening pain (relative risk ratio [95% CI], 0.55 [0.32-0.94]; P = 0.023) and hospital usage (i.e., the combination of emergency department visits and hospital readmissions) (0.38 [0.15-0.99]; P = 0.035), but did not differ from control patients in terms of adverse drug events (1.05 [0.66-1.68]), falls (1.19 [0.71-1.99]), worsening mobility (0.39 [0.13-1.15]), worsening behaviors (0.52 [0.25-1.10]), or increased confusion (0.59 [0.28-1.22]). When data for patients who had died were included, the intervention had no effect on hospital usage in all patients (0.58 [0.28-1.21]).
                Older people transferring from hospital to a long-term care facility are vulnerable to fragmentation of care and adverse events. In this study, use of a pharmacist transition coordinator improved aspects of inappropriate use of medicines across health sectors. Older people in nursing and residential homes often have complex disabilities and behavioural disturbances. Recent publicity has highlighted the dangers of medication in this group, and controls over prescribing have been suggested.
                To investigate the effect of a review of medication by a pharmacist.
                An 8-month prospective trial of an active medication review by a pharmacist was carried out on 330 residents in nursing homes in Manchester.
                The intervention group experienced greater deterioration in cognitive function and behavioural disturbance than the control group, but the changes in depression and quality of life were similar for both groups. The number of drugs prescribed fell in the intervention group, but not in the control group, with a corresponding saving in drug costs. The number of deaths was significantly smaller in the intervention homes during the intervention period (4 v. 14) but not overall during the study period as a whole (26 v. 28).
                This clinical intervention reduced the number of medicines prescribed to elderly people in nursing homes, with minimal impact on their morbidity and mortality. efficient strategies are needed to provide specialist advice in nursing homes to ensure quality medical care. We describe a case conference intervention involving a multidisciplinary team of health professionals.
                to evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary case conferences on the appropriateness of medications and on patient behaviours in high-level residential aged care facilities.
                cluster-randomised controlled trial.
                ten high-level aged care facilities.
                154 residents with medication problems and/or challenging behaviours were selected for case conference by residential care staff.
                two multidisciplinary case conferences involving the resident's general practitioner, a geriatrician, a pharmacist and residential care staff were held at the nursing home for each resident.
                outcomes were assessed at baseline and 3 months. The primary outcome was the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI). The behaviour of each resident was assessed via the Nursing Home Behaviour Problem Scale.
                45 residents died before follow-up. Medication appropriateness improved in the intervention group [MAI mean change 4.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1-6.1] compared with the control group (MAI mean change 0.4, 95% CI -0.4-1.2; P < 0.001). There was a significant reduction in the MAI for benzodiazepines (mean change control -0.38, 95% CI -1.02-0.27 versus intervention 0.73, 95% CI 0.16-1.30; P = 0.017). Resident behaviours were unchanged after the intervention and the improved medication appropriateness did not extend to other residents in the facility.
                multidisciplinary case conferences in nursing homes can improve care. Outreach specialist services can be delivered without direct patient contact and achieve improvements in prescribing. To evaluate the efficacy of computerized provider order entry with clinical decision support for preventing adverse drug events in long-term care.
                Cluster-randomized controlled trial.
                Two large long-term care facilities.
                One thousand one hundred eighteen long-term care residents of 29 resident care units.
                The 29 resident care units, each with computerized provider order entry, were randomized to having a clinical decision support system (intervention units) or not (control units).
                The number of adverse drug events, severity of events, and whether the events were preventable.
                Within intervention units, 411 adverse drug events occurred over 3,803 resident-months of observation time; 152 (37.0%) were deemed preventable. Within control units, there were 340 adverse drug events over 3,257 resident-months of observation time; 126 (37.1%) were characterized as preventable. There were 10.8 adverse drug events per 100 resident-months and 4.0 preventable events per 100 resident-months on intervention units. There were 10.4 adverse drug events per 100 resident-months and 3.9 preventable events per 100 resident-months on control units. Comparing intervention and control units, the adjusted rate ratios were 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI)=0.92-1.23) for all adverse drug events and 1.02 (95% CI=0.81-1.30) for preventable adverse drug events.
                Computerized provider order entry with decision support did not reduce the adverse drug event rate or preventable adverse drug event rate in the long-term care setting. Alert burden, limited scope of the alerts, and a need to more fully integrate clinical and laboratory information may have affected efficacy. To evaluate whether a year long clinical pharmacy program involving development of professional relationships, nurse education on medication issues, and individualized medication reviews could change drug use, mortality and morbidity in nursing home residents.
                A cluster randomised controlled trial, where an intervention home was matched to three control homes, was used to examine the effect of the clinical pharmacy intervention on resident outcomes. The study involved 905 residents in 13 intervention nursing homes and 2325 residents in 39 control nursing homes in south-east Queensland and north-east New South Wales, Australia. The outcome measures were: continuous drug use data from government prescription subsidy claims, cross-sectional drug use data on prescribed and administered medications, deaths and morbidity indices (hospitalization rates, adverse events and disability indices).
                This intervention resulted in a reduction in drug use with no change in morbidity indices or survival. Differences in nursing home characteristics, as defined by cluster analysis with SUDAAN, negated intervention-related apparent significant improvements in survival. The use of benzodiazepines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, laxatives, histamine H2-receptor antagonists and antacids was significantly reduced in the intervention group, whereas the use of digoxin and diuretics remained similar to controls. Overall, drug use in the intervention group was reduced by 14.8% relative to the controls, equivalent to an annual prescription saving of A64 dollars per resident (approximately 25 pound sterling).
                This intervention improved nursing home resident outcomes related to changes in drug use and drug-related expenditure. The continuing divergence in both drug use and survival at the end of the study suggests that the difference would have been more significant in a larger and longer study, and even more so using additional instruments specific for measuring outcomes related to changes in drug use. Investigating whether and how the prescribing behaviour of general practitioners (GPs) can be changed by the pharmacist's feedback.
                Randomised, prospective.
                Residential home 'Bernlef', Groningen, the Netherlands.
                In the period 2 February-18 March 1993 the effect of different ways of sending prescriptions by the pharmacist on medication use was investigated. The 43 GPs of the inhabitants were randomly divided in 3 groups. Group A formed the control group and was requested to send their prescriptions as before, group B moreover received a list with the medication used by their patients, group C also got a list with the actual medication of their patients as well as recommendations by the pharmacist. Effects on medication use were determined after 4 weeks.
                The 196 inhabitants used an average of 6.5 drugs (range 0-19). No difference was found between group A and group B, but there was a difference with group C. In all three groups the number of added drugs increased by 5%, but the number of deleted drugs was 7% in group C, as against only 3% in groups A and B (p < 0.05). The feedback of the pharmacist that for 44% of GPs contained new information resulted 9 times in the ending of medication and 4 times in decreasing of the dose.
                Pharmacist's feedback by means of remarks on prescribed medication positively influences prescription behaviour of the GP. to measure the impact of pharmacist-conducted clinical medication review with elderly care home residents.
                randomised controlled trial of clinical medication review by a pharmacist against usual care.
                sixty-five care homes for the elderly in Leeds, UK. Participants: a total of 661 residents aged 65+ years on one or more medicines. Intervention: clinical medication review by a pharmacist with patient and clinical records. Recommendations to general practitioner for approval and implementation. Control patients received usual general practitioner care.
                primary: number of changes in medication per participant. Secondary: number and cost of repeat medicines per participant; medication review rate; mortality, falls, hospital admissions, general practitioner consultations, Barthel index, Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE).
                the pharmacist reviewed 315/331 (95.2%) patients in 6 months. A total of 62/330 (18.8%) control patients were reviewed by their general practitioner. The mean number of drug changes per patient were 3.1 for intervention and 2.4 for control group (P < 0.0001). There were respectively 0.8 and 1.3 falls per patient (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference for GP consultations per patient (means 2.9 and 2.8 in 6 months, P = 0.5), hospitalisations (means 0.2 and 0.3, P = 0.11), deaths (51/331 and 48/330, P = 0.81), Barthel score (9.8 and 9.3, P = 0.06), SMMSE score (13.9 and 13.8, P = 0.62), number and cost of drugs per patient (6.7 and 6.9, P = 0.5) (pounds sterling 42.24 and pounds sterling 42.94 per 28 days). A total of 75.6% (565/747) of pharmacist recommendations were accepted by the general practitioner; and 76.6% (433/565) of accepted recommendations were implemented.
                general practitioners do not review most care home patients' medication. A clinical pharmacist can review them and make recommendations that are usually accepted. This leads to substantial change in patients' medication regimens without change in drug costs. There is a reduction in the number of falls. There is no significant change in consultations, hospitalisation, mortality, SMMSE or Barthel scores.
Robust conclusions could not be drawn from the evidence due to variability in design, interventions, outcomes and results. The interventions implemented in the studies in this review led to the identification and resolution of medication-related problems, however evidence of an effect on resident-related outcomes was not found. There is a need for high-quality cluster-randomised controlled trials testing clinical decision support systems and multidisciplinary interventions that measure well-defined, important resident-related outcomes.