Public awareness and views on unlicensed use of medicines in children.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT center dot There is increasing concern about the use of those medicines in children which have not been fully studied and licensed for childhood use. Such use is not uncommon, due in large part to a lack of availability of fully licensed products and formulations that are suitable for children. center dot There is little published information on the views of the public on this important area of paediatric care. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS center dot A survey of 1000 members of the public in Northern Ireland indicated that such use of medicines in children is not well known. center dot However, when informed about this practice, the majority believed that it would compromise safety and increase the likelihood of adverse effects. They also believed that parents/guardians should be told if their child was prescribed a medicine that had not been fully tested in children. center dot Participants in the survey indicated that they would be reluctant to involve their child in a clinical trial to help with the licensing process unless the child was suffering from a life-threatening illness. To explore awareness and views of the general public on unlicensed use of medicines in children and on the participation of children in clinical trials. Members of the public completed a questionnaire survey administered by face-to-face interview in public areas in N. Ireland. The main outcome measures were the views on unlicensed use of medicines in children and on clinical trials in children. One thousand participants (59.2% female) took part; 610 were parents. Most participants (86%) had no previous knowledge about unlicensed use of medicines in children. Being a parent did not influence this nor did being a parent of a child who suffered from a health problem (P > 0.05). Most participants (92%) felt that parents should be told about unlicensed use of medicines, with the doctor most frequently selected as the person who should inform parents. At the outset, only 1.8% of participants felt that the use of medicines in children was unsafe. However, having been informed about unlicensed use of medicines, this proportion increased dramatically (62.4%; P <0.001). Views on whether participants would enter a child of their own into a clinical trial varied according to the health status of the child (P <0.05) i.e. a child in good health (3.9%) vs a child with a life-threatening condition (41.9%). There is limited public knowledge of unlicensed use of medicines in children and a general reluctance to involve children in clinical trials unless the child to be involved has a life-threatening condition.

Intermediate Care: The Role of Medicines Management

Healthcare systems worldwide are facing an unprecedented demographic change as globally, the number of older people will triple to 2 billion by the year 2050. The resulting pressures on acute services have been instrumental in the development of intermediate care (IC) as a new healthcare model, which has its origins in the National Health Service in the UK. IC is an umbrella term for patient services that do not require the resources of a general hospital but are beyond the scope of a traditional primary care team. IC aims to promote timely discharge from hospital, prevent unnecessary hospital admissions and reduce the need for long-term residential care by optimizing functional independence. Various healthcare providers around the world have adopted similar models of care to manage changing healthcare needs. Polypharmacy, along with age-related changes, places older people at an increased risk of adverse drug events, including inappropriate prescribing, which has been shown to be prevalent in this population in other healthcare settings. Medicines management (the practice of maximizing health through optimal use of medicines) of older people has been discussed in the literature in a variety of settings; however, its place within IC is largely unknown. Despite IC being a multidisciplinary healthcare model, there is a lack of evidence to suggest that enhanced pharmaceutical involvement is core to the service provided within IC. This review article highlights the gap in the literature surrounding medicines management within IC and identifies potential solutions aimed at improving patient outcomes in this setting.

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people

Background
Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, hence interest in appropriate polypharmacy, where many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients, is growing.

Objectives
This review sought to determine which interventions, alone or in combination, are effective in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people.

Search methods
In November 2013, for this first update, a range of literature databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched, and handsearching of reference lists was performed. Search terms included 'polypharmacy', 'medication appropriateness' and 'inappropriate prescribing'.

Selection criteria
A range of study designs were eligible. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in people 65 years of age and older in which a validated measure of appropriateness was used (e.g. Beers criteria, Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI)).

Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Study-specific estimates were pooled, and a random-effects model was used to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to assess the overall quality of evidence for each pooled outcome.

Main results
Two studies were added to this review to bring the total number of included studies to 12. One intervention consisted of computerised decision support; 11 complex, multi-faceted pharmaceutical approaches to interventions were provided in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals, such as prescribers and pharmacists. Appropriateness of prescribing was measured using validated tools, including the MAI score post intervention (eight studies), Beers criteria (four studies), STOPP criteria (two studies) and START criteria (one study). Interventions included in this review resulted in a reduction in inappropriate medication usage. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall quality of evidence for all pooled outcomes ranged from very low to low. A greater reduction in MAI scores between baseline and follow-up was seen in the intervention group when compared with the control group (four studies; mean difference -6.78, 95% CI -12.34 to -1.22). Postintervention pooled data showed a lower summated MAI score (five studies; mean difference -3.88, 95% CI -5.40 to -2.35) and fewer Beers drugs per participant (two studies; mean difference -0.1, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.09) in the intervention group compared with the control group. Evidence of the effects of interventions on hospital admissions (five studies) and of medication-related problems (six studies) was conflicting.

Authors' conclusions
It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy, such as pharmaceutical care, resulted in clinically significant improvement; however, they appear beneficial in terms of reducing inappropriate prescribing.

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy in older people: a Cochrane systematic review

Objective: To summarise the findings of an updated Cochrane review of interventions aimed at improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy in older people. Design: Cochrane systematic review. Multiple electronic databases were searched including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from inception to November 2013). Hand searching of references was also performed. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, controlled before-and-after studies and interrupted time series analyses reporting on interventions targeting appropriate polypharmacy in older people in any healthcare setting were included if they used a validated measure of prescribing appropriateness. Evidence quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation).
Setting: All healthcare settings. 
Participants: Older people (≥65 years) with ≥1 long-term condition who were receiving polypharmacy (≥4 regular medicines).
Primary and secondary outcome measures: Primary outcomes were the change in prevalence of appropriate polypharmacy and hospital admissions. Medication-related problems (eg, adverse drug reactions), medication adherence and quality of life were included as secondary outcomes.
Results: 12 studies were included: 8 RCTs, 2 cluster RCTs and 2 controlled before-and-after studies. 1 study involved computerised decision support and 11 comprised pharmaceutical care approaches across various settings. Appropriateness was measured using validated tools, including the Medication Appropriateness Index, Beers’ criteria and Screening Tool of Older Person’s Prescriptions (STOPP)/ Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START). The interventions demonstrated a reduction in inappropriate prescribing. Evidence of effect on hospital admissions and medication-related problems was conflicting. No differences in health-related quality of life were reported.
Conclusions: The included interventions demonstrated improvements in appropriate polypharmacy based on reductions in inappropriate prescribing. However, it remains unclear if interventions resulted in clinically significant improvements (eg, in terms of hospital admissions). Future intervention studies would benefit from available guidance on intervention development, evaluation and reporting to facilitate replication in clinical practice.

Pharmacy students' use and views on over-the-counter (OTC) medicines; a questionnaire study

Introduction
The role of the pharmacist centers on ensuring the safe and effective use of medicines, including over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. It is important to ascertain pharmacy students’ use and opinions on OTC medicines, given that they are the pharmacists of the future and that this market continues to expand. This study aimed to investigate Queen’s University Belfast (QUB) final year pharmacy students’ use and views on OTC medicines. Scarce work has been conducted in this area to date.

Methods
Following ethical approval and a pilot study, all students (n=155) were invited to participate in a self-completed questionnaire (n=20 questions), distributed at a mandatory class. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests (Chi-squared and Mann Whitney U-test) were used for data analyses.

Results
The response rate was 99.4% (154/155). The majority (153/155) reported using OTC medicines; the key consideration during personal product selection was effectiveness. Most [96.1% (147/153)] were in agreement that safety was the over-riding concern during OTC consultations. While 96.1% (149/155) considered that using an evidence-based approach improved the quality of patient care, 68.0% (104/153) would be prepared to sell a product that lacks evidence of effectiveness, provided it would not cause harm.

Conclusions
The importance of evidence of effectiveness was acknowledged, yet many students in this study were prepared to recommend unproven products. Further strategies are required at QUB to ensure this routine consideration alongside safety in practice.