Patterns of psychotropic prescribing and polypharmacy in older hospitalized patients in Ireland: the influence of dementia on prescribing

Neuropsychiatric Symptoms (NPS) are ubiquitous in dementia and are often treated pharmacologically. The objectives of this study were to describe the use of psychotropic, anti-cholinergic, and deliriogenic medications and to identify the prevalence of polypharmacy and psychotropic polypharmacy, among older hospitalized patients in Ireland, with and without dementia. All older patients (≥ 70 years old) that had elective or emergency admissions to six Irish study hospitals were eligible for inclusion in a longitudinal observational study. Of 676 eligible patients, 598 patients were recruited and diagnosed as having dementia, or not, by medical experts. These 598 patients were assessed for delirium, medication use, co-morbidity, functional ability, and nutritional status. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of medication data on admission for 583/598 patients with complete medication data, and controlled for age, sex, and co-morbidity. Of 149 patients diagnosed with dementia, only 53 had a previous diagnosis. At hospital admission, 458/583 patients experienced polypharmacy (≥ 5 medications). People with dementia (PwD) were significantly more likely to be prescribed at least one psychotropic medication than patients without dementia (99/147 vs. 182/436; p < 0.001). PwD were also more likely to experience psychotropic polypharmacy (≥ two psychotropics) than those without dementia (54/147 vs. 61/436; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the prescribing patterns of anti-cholinergics (23/147 vs. 42/436; p = 0.18) or deliriogenics (79/147 vs. 235/436; p = 0.62). Polypharmacy and psychotropic drug use is highly prevalent in older Irish hospitalized patients, especially in PwD. Hospital admission presents an ideal time for medication reviews in PwD.

Issues in the prescribing of psychotropic and psychoactive medication for persons with learning disability: quantitative and qualitative perspectives

The administration of psychotropic and psychoactive medication for persons with learning disability and accompanying mental illness and/or challenging behaviour has undergone much critical review over the past two decades. Assessment and diagnosis of mental illness in this population continues to be psychopharmacological treatment include polypharmacy, irrational prescription procedures and frequent over-prescription. It is clear that all forms of treatment including non-pharmacological interventions need to be driven by accurate and appropriate diagnoses. Where a psychiatric diagnosis has been identified, it greatly aides the selection of appropriate medication, although a specific medication for each diagnosis, as was once hoped, is simply no longer a reality in practice. Part one of the present thesis seeks to address many of the current issues in mental health problems and pharmacological treatment to date. The author undertook a drug prevalence study within both residential and community facilities for persons with learning disability within the Mid-West region of Ireland in order to ascertain the current level of prescribing of psychotropic and psychoactive medications for this population. While many attempts have been made to account for the variation in prescribing, little systematic and empirical research has been undertaken to investigate the factors thought to influence such prescribing. While studies investigating the prescribing behaviours of General Practitioners (GP's) have illustrated the complex nature of the decision making process in the context of general practice, no similar efforts have yet been directed at examining the prescribing behaviours of Consultant Psychiatrists. Using The Critical Incident Technique, the author interviewed Consultant Psychiatrists in the Republic of Ireland to gather information relating not only to their patterns of prescribing for learning disabled populations, but also to examine reasons influencing their prescribing in addition to several related factors. Part two of this thesis presents the findings from this study and a number of issues are raised, not only in relation to attempting to account for the findings from part one of the thesis, but also with respect to implications for improved management and clinical practice.

Pharmacotherapy optimization in older patients by a structured clinical pharmacist assessment and intervention

Introduction: Older individuals are particularly vulnerable to potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), drug related problems (DRPs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). A number of different interventions have been proposed to address these issues. However to-date there is a paucity of well-designed trials examining the impact of such interventions. Therefore the aims of this work were to: (i) establish a baseline PIP prevalence both nationally and internationally using the STOPP, Beers and PRISCUS criteria, (ii) identify the most comprehensive method of assessing PIP in older individuals, (iii) develop a structured pharmacist intervention supported by a computer decisions support system (CDSS) and (iv) examine the impact of this intervention on prescribing and incidence of ADRs. Results: This work identified high rates of PIP across all three healthcare settings in Ireland, 84.7% in the long term care, 70.7% in secondary care and 43.3% in primary care being reported. This work identified that for a comprehensive assessment of prescribing to be undertaken, an amalgamation of all three criteria should be deployed simultaneously. High prevalences of DRPs and PIP in older hospitalised individuals were identified. With 82.0% and 76.3% of patients reported to have at least one DRP or PIP instance respectively. The structured pharmacist intervention demonstrated a positive impact on prescribing, with a significant reduction MAI scores being reported. It also resulted in the intervention patients’ having a reduced risk of experiencing an ADR when compared to the control patients (absolute risk reduction of 6.8 (95% CI 1.5% - 12.3%)) and the number needed to treat = 15 (95% CI 8 - 68). However the intervention was found to have no significant effect on length of stay or mortality rate. Conclusion: This work shows that PIP is highly prevalent in older individuals across three healthcare settings in Ireland. This work also demonstrates that a structured pharmacist intervention support by a dedicated CDSS can significantly improve the appropriateness of prescribing and reduce the incidence of ADRs in older acutely ill hospitalised individuals.