Diabetes in the very elderly:need for an individualised approach

Background: Intensive risk factor management is recommended for individuals with diabetes. However, it is not known if such an approach is appropriate in the elderly with multiple comorbidities and limited life expectancy. The aim of this study was to characterise a cohort of very elderly individuals with diabetes and assess the impact of known risk factors on mortality. Methods: This was a retrospective audit approved by the clinical audit lead. All patients aged >80 years who attended diabetes outpatient clinics 2 years prior to the date of the audit (April 2012) were identified from clinic records. A detailed history including demographics, comorbidities and treatment were collected. Blood pressure readings, HbA1c, cholesterol and renal function were extracted and the mean of these readings was recorded. Survival status at 2 years was recorded for all patients. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS19. Results: Data were available for 864 (381 male, 483 female) patients. The majority (75%) lived in their own home. More than 60% had multiple comorbidities and 25% had a prior history of cardiovascular disease. Two-thirds of the patients had more than one hospital admission in 2 years and a third had more than three admissions. 60% were on either insulin or a sulfonylurea. Mean HbA1c was 7.6%, cholesterol 4.2mmol/l, systolic blood pressure 145mmHg and eGFR 53ml/min. Over 2 years, 174 (20%)had died. Age, creatinine and previous coronary heart disease were significant predictors of death. Conclusion: The benefits of intensive diabetes management appear to be uncertain in very elderly patients. The need for intensive treatment must therefore be individualised to each patient.

The potential for pharmacists to manage children attending emergency departments

AIM: There have been concerns about maintaining appropriate clinical staff levels in Emergency Departments in England.1 The aim of this study was to determine if Emergency Department attendees aged from 0-16 years could be managed by community pharmacists or hospital independent prescriber pharmacists with or without further advanced clinical practice training. METHOD: A prospective, 48 site, cross-sectional, observational study of patients attending Emergency Departments (ED) in England, UK was conducted. Pharmacists at each site collected up to 400 admissions and paediatric patients were included in the data collection. The pharmacist independent prescribers (one for each site) were asked to identify patient attendance at their Emergency Department, record anonymised details of the cases-age, weight, presenting complaint, clinical grouping (e.g. medicine, orthopaedics), and categorise each presentation into one of four possible categories: CP, Community Pharmacist, cases which could be managed by a community pharmacist outside an ED setting; IP-cases that could be managed at ED by a hospital pharmacist with independent prescriber status; IPT, Independent Prescriber Pharmacist with additional training-cases which could be managed at ED by a hospital pharmacist independent prescriber with additional clinical training; and MT, Medical Team only-cases that were unsuitable for the pharmacist to manage. An Impact Index was calculated for the two most frequent clinical groupings using the formula: Impact index=percentage of the total workload of the clinical grouping multiplied by the percentage ability of pharmacists to manage that clinical group. RESULTS: 1623 out of 18,229 (9%) attendees, from 45 of the 48 sites, were children aged from 0 to 16 years of age (median 8 yrs, range 0-16), 749 were female and 874 were male. Of the 1623 admissions, 9% of the cases were judged to be suitable for clinical management by a community pharmacist (CP), 4% suitable for a hospital pharmacist independent prescriber (IP), 32% suitable for a hospital independent pharmacist prescriber with additional training (IPT); and the remaining 55% were only suitable for the Medical Team (MT). The most frequent clinical groups and impact index for the attendees were General Medicine=10.78 and orthopaedics=10.60. CONCLUSION: Paediatric patients attending Emergency Departments were judged by pharmacists to be suitable for management outside a hospital setting in approximately 1 in 11 cases, and by hospital independent prescriber pharmacists in 4 in 10 cases. With further training, it was found that the total proportion of cases that could be managed by a pharmacist was 45%. The greatest impact for pharmacist management occurs in general medicine and orthopaedics.

Epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon hospital admission in children - a systematic review

Objectives: NICE/NPSA excluded children under 16 from their guidance concerning medicines reconciliation (MR) upon admission.1 Our aims and objectives of conducting the literature review was to identify the epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon admission, transfer and discharge in children, and if they require MR. Method: Six bibliographical databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science and Biosis Previews) and selected key words were used to find epidemiological studies on medication discrepancies in children upon hospital admission, transfer and discharge (key words included ‘medication discrepancy’; ‘medication reconciliation’; ‘hospital admission’; ‘hospital discharge’; ‘hospital transfer’); studies where the data for children could be extracted were included. Results: From the 1239 articles found (in May 2011), eight of the articles had extractable paediatric information, (five from Canada, two from USA, one from UK). Five of the studies involved discrepancies on admission, one involved discrepancies on admission and transfer, one involved discrepancies at transfer and one considered discharge. The reference point used to compare against the admission, transfer and the discharge order differed in each of the studies. Four studies used a rating scale to assess the clinical significance of the discrepancies to demonstrate the potential adverse clinical outcome of patients in the absence of clinical intervention. Two studies2 3 used a rating scale that was used in adults.4 A study of paediatric neurosurgical patients found that initial hospital prescriptions for children differed from the preadmission prescriptions in 39% of occasions and 50% of all prescribing variations had the potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.2 A study by Coffey et al in general paediatric admissions in Canada showed 22% of patients experienced at least one discrepancy and 29% of the discrepancies had the potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.3 By comparison an epidemiological study in discrepancies in adults on admission had 38.6% of the discrepancies identified with a potential to cause moderate or severe discomfort or clinical deterioration.4 All the studies involved small samples or specific patient groups such as medically complex patients. However all of the studies demonstrated that discrepancies occurred among paediatric populations during transitions in care settings and mentioned MR as an intervention. Conclusion: The results have shown that discrepancies of medication upon hospital admission, transfer and discharge occur regularly in children. With only one published study in the UK looking at hospital admission in children, and no published articles on the incidence and epidemiology of medication discrepancies upon hospital transfer or discharge further research is required in a wider paediatric population. Further work is also required to define the required interventions to improve practice.