Improving appropriate polypharmacy for older people in primary care: selecting components of an evidence-based intervention to target prescribing and dispensing.

Background
The use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy) is increasingly common in older people. Ensuring that patients receive the most appropriate combinations of medications (appropriate polypharmacy) is a significant challenge. The quality of evidence to support the effectiveness of interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is low. Systematic identification of mediators of behaviour change, using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), provides a theoretically robust evidence base to inform intervention design. This study aimed to (1) identify key theoretical domains that were perceived to influence the prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older patients by general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists, and (2) map domains to associated behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to include as components of an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care.

Methods
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of each healthcare professional (HCP) group using tailored topic guides based on TDF version 1 (12 domains). Questions covering each domain explored HCPs’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators to ensuring the prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older people. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis involved the framework method and content analysis. Key domains were identified and mapped to BCTs based on established methods and discussion within the research team.

Results
Thirty HCPs were interviewed (15 GPs, 15 pharmacists). Eight key domains were identified, perceived to influence prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy: ‘Skills’, ‘Beliefs about capabilities’, ‘Beliefs about consequences’, ‘Environmental context and resources’, ‘Memory, attention and decision processes’, ‘Social/professional role and identity’, ‘Social influences’ and ‘Behavioural regulation’. Following mapping, four BCTs were selected for inclusion in an intervention for GPs or pharmacists: ‘Action planning’, ‘Prompts/cues’, ‘Modelling or demonstrating of behaviour’ and ‘Salience of consequences’. An additional BCT (‘Social support or encouragement’) was selected for inclusion in a community pharmacy-based intervention in order to address barriers relating to interprofessional working that were encountered by pharmacists.

Conclusions
Selected BCTs will be operationalised in a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy for older people, to be delivered in GP practice and community pharmacy settings. Future research will involve development and feasibility testing of this intervention.

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.

Withdrawal of Antidementia Drugs in Older People: Who, When and How?

The evidence base to guide withdrawal of antidementia medications in older people with dementia is limited; while some randomised controlled studies have considered discontinuation of cholinesterase inhibitors, no such studies examining discontinuation of the N-Methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist memantine have been conducted to date. The purpose of this opinion article was to summarise the existing evidence on withdrawal of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine, to highlight the key considerations for clinicians when making these prescribing decisions and to offer guidance as to when and how treatment might be discontinued. Until the evidence-base is enhanced by the findings of large scale randomised controlled discontinuation trials of ChEIs and memantine which use multiple, clinically relevant cognitive, functional and behavioural outcome measures, clinicians’ prescribing decisions involve balancing the risks of discontinuation with side-effects and costs of continued treatment. Such decisions must be highly individualised and patient-centred.

Prescribing of Psychoactive Drugs for Older People in Nursing Homes: An Analysis of Treatment Culture

Background There is increasing interest in how culture may affect the quality of healthcare services, and previous research has shown that ‘treatment culture’—of which there are three categories (resident centred, ambiguous and traditional)—in a nursing home may influence prescribing of psychoactive medications. Objective The objective of this study was to explore and understand treatment culture in prescribing of psychoactive medications for older people with dementia in nursing homes. Method Six nursing homes—two from each treatment culture category—participated in this study. Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews with nursing home staff and general practitioners (GPs), which sought to determine participants’ views on prescribing and administration of psychoactive medication, and their understanding of treatment culture and its potential influence on prescribing of psychoactive drugs. Following verbatim transcription, the data were analysed and themes were identified, facilitated by NVivo and discussion within the research team. Results Interviews took place with five managers, seven nurses, 13 care assistants and two GPs. Four themes emerged: the characteristics of the setting, the characteristics of the individual, relationships and decision making. The characteristics of the setting were exemplified by views of the setting, daily routines and staff training. The characteristics of the individual were demonstrated by views on the personhood of residents and staff attitudes. Relationships varied between staff within and outside the home. These relationships appeared to influence decision making about prescribing of medications. The data analysis found that each home exhibited traits that were indicative of its respective assigned treatment culture. Conclusion Nursing home treatment culture appeared to be influenced by four main themes. Modification of these factors may lead to a shift in culture towards a more flexible, resident-centred culture and a reduction in prescribing and use of psychoactive medication. 

‘Potentially inappropriate or specifically appropriate?’ Qualitative evaluation of general practitioners views on prescribing, polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people

Background: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is common in older people in primary care, as evidenced by a significant body of quantitative research. However, relatively few qualitative studies have investigated the phenomenon of PIP and its underlying processes from the perspective of general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this paper is to explore qualitatively, GP perspectives regarding prescribing and PIP in older primary care patients.

Method: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with GPs participating in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of an intervention to decrease PIP in older patients (≥70 years) in Ireland. Interviews were conducted with GP participants (both intervention and control) from the OPTI-SCRIPT cluster RCT as part of the trial process evaluation between January and July 2013. Interviews were conducted by one interviewer and audio recorded. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis was conducted.

Results: Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted (13 male; 4 female). Three main, inter-related themes emerged (complex prescribing environment, paternalistic doctor-patient relationship, and relevance of PIP concept). Patient complexity (e.g. polypharmacy, multimorbidity), as well as prescriber complexity (e.g. multiple prescribers, poor communication, restricted autonomy) were all identified as factors contributing to a complex prescribing environment where PIP could occur, as was a paternalistic-doctor patient relationship. The concept of PIP was perceived to be of variable usefulness to GPs and the criteria to measure it may be at odds with the complex processes of prescribing for this patient population.

Conclusions: Several inter-related factors contributing to the occurrence of PIP were identified, some of which may be amenable to intervention. Improvement strategies focused on improved management of polypharmacy and multimorbidity, and communication across primary and secondary care could result in substantial improvements in PIP.

A process evaluation of a cluster randomised trial to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people in primary care (OPTI-SCRIPT study)

Background
The OPTI-SCRIPT cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) found that a three-phase multifaceted intervention including academic detailing with a pharmacist, GP-led medicines reviews, supported by web-based pharmaceutical treatment algorithms, and tailored patient information leaflets, was effective in reducing potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in Irish primary care. We report a process evaluation exploring the implementation of the intervention, the experiences of those participating in the study and lessons for future implementation.

Methods
The OPTI-SCRIPT trial included 21 GP practices and 196 patients. The process evaluation used mixed methods. Quantitative data were collected from all GP practices and semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs from intervention and control groups, and a purposive sample of patients from the intervention group. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis.

Results
Despite receiving a standardised academic detailing session, intervention delivery varied among GP practices. Just over 70 % of practices completed medicines review as recommended with the patient present. Only single-handed practices conducted reviews without patients present, highlighting the influence of practice characteristics and resources on variation. Medications were more likely to be completely stopped or switched to another more appropriate medication when reviews were conducted with patients present. The patient information leaflets were not used by any of the intervention practices. Both GP (32 %) and patient (40 %) recruitment rates were modest. For those who did participate, overall, the experience was positively viewed, with GPs and patients referring to the value of medication reviews to improve prescribing and reduce unnecessary medications. Lack of time in busy GP practices and remuneration were identified as organisational barriers to future implementation.

Conclusions
The OPTI-SCRIPT intervention was positively viewed by both GPs and patients, both of whom valued the study’s objectives. Patient information leaflets were not a successful component of the intervention. Academic detailing and medication reviews are important components in changing PIP, and having patients present during the review process seems to be a more effective approach for decreasing PIP.

How well do elderly people complete individualised quality of life measures: an exploratory study.

This research note describes and discusses a study which investigated the feasibility of using an individualised approach to measure the quality of life (QoL) of a sample of older people who were in receipt of an early hospital discharge service. Most participants (86%) were able to identify areas of their lives which were important to them, rate their level of functioning on each of these areas and rank their life areas in order of importance. However, 39% were unable to quantify the relative importance of each area of life. Indeed, the majority (57%) of participants who were over 75 years old could not complete this “weighting” or evaluative stage. The results suggest that the phenomenological approach to measuring QoL may be employed successfully with older people but that the “weighting” system used by existing individualised QoL measures needs to be refined, especially when assessing people over 75.

A Home from Hospital service for older people.

Current policy and practice emphasises much more than ever before a need for purchasers and providers to reduce appropriately the length of hospital stay. Consequently, a number of early discharge “schemes” have been developed. This paper presents the findings from an evaluation of a “home from hospital” (HFH) scheme. The HFH service provides a maximum of six weeks intensive domiciliary care for older people on their discharge from hospital. The aim of the service is to facilitate early discharge from hospital and to assist patients to regain independence. The study reported here elicited the views and perceptions of clients and professionals involved in the HFH scheme about the quality, efficiency and effectiveness of the service. Seventy-five clients were discharged from hospital to the HFH scheme during a two month period and those who consented to participate in the study were interviewed after discharge from the HFH service (n = 40). Participants had attended hospital for various conditions but the largest group were fracture patients. Hospital staff and community based professionals completed a questionnaire about the service. Overall, clients and professionals perceived the HFH scheme as a beneficial service, though some minor problems existed at an individual level. Clients’ dependency levels generally decreased during their time on the scheme. Research using a controlled design is necessary in order to draw firm conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of a HFH service. Overall, home-from-hospital appears to be an effective model of an early discharge scheme worthy of further attention.

Reduced vision in older adults with age related macular degeneration interferes with ability to care for self and impairs role as carer

Aim: To study the relation between visual impairment and ability to care for oneself or a dependant in older people with age related macular degeneration (AMD). Method: Cross sectional study of older people with visual impairment due to AMD in a specialised retinal service clinic. 199 subjects who underwent visual function assessment (fully corrected distance and near acuity and contrast sensitivity in both eyes), followed by completion of a package of questionnaires dealing with general health status (SF36), visual functioning (Daily Living Tasks Dependent on Vision, DLTV) and ability to care for self or provide care to others. The outcome measure was self reported ability to care for self and others. Three levels of self reported ability to care were identified—inability to care for self (level 1), ability to care for self but not others (level 2), and ability to care for self and others (level 3). Results: People who reported good general health status and visual functioning (that is, had high scores on SF36 and DLTV) were more likely to state that they were able to care for self and others. Similarly people with good vision in the better seeing eye were more likely to report ability to care for self and others. People with a distance visual acuity (DVA) worse than 0.4 logMAR (Snellen 6/15) had less than 50% probability of assigning themselves to care level 3 and those with DVA worse than 1.0 logMAR (Snellen 6/60) had a probability of greater than 50% or for assigning themselves to care level 1. Regression analyses with level of care as the dependent variable and demographic factors, DLTV subscales, and SF36 dimensions as the explanatory variables confirmed that the DLTV subscale 1 was the most important variable in the transition from care level 3 to care level 2. The regression analyses also confirmed that the DLTV subscale 2 was the most important in the transition from care level 3 to care level 1. Conclusions: Ability to care for self and dependants has a strong relation with self reported visual functioning and quality of life and is adversely influenced by visual impairment. The acuity at which the balance of probability shifts in the direction of diminished ability to care for self or others is lower than the level set by social care agencies for provision of support. These findings have implications for those involved with visual rehabilitation and for studies of the cost effectiveness of interventions in AMD.

Older, Louder and Stronger: the Changing Ageing Partnership putting older people first

The Changing Ageing Partnership (Cap) in Northern Ireland was established to help place older people’s voices at the heart of policy development. Making research relevant to the needs of society and translating the findings of research into policy and practice are challenges shared by all working in the field of ageing. This paper describes Cap’s development and evolution over the past three years. It provides an insight into the strategies used by Cap to stimulate interest in ageing related research across Queen’s University Belfast and in enabling older people and others to be active participants in the research process. The paper concludes by highlighting the challenges that remain.

The effect of patient characteristics upon uptake of the influenza vaccination: a study comparing community based older adults in two healthcare systems

Background: Uptake of influenza vaccination represents a simple marker of proactive care of older people. However, many still do not receive the vaccine. To understand this challenge better, we investigated the relationship between patient characteristics (demographic, physical and psychological health, and health service use) and vaccination uptake in a sample of community-dwelling older people in two adjacent but differently structured healthcare systems (Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (RoI)). Methods: 2,033 randomly selected community-dwelling older adults (65 years and older) were interviewed in their homes. Results: Rates of uptake were 78% in NI and 72% in RoI. Uptake was greater with older age (odds ratio (OR) 1.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.3-2.1, p