Characteristics and preventability of medication-related admissions for acute kidney injury and dehydration in elderly patients

Purpose: Patients with impaired renal function using medication that affects glomerular filtration rate are at increased risk of developing acute kidney injury (AKI) leading to hospital admissions. The risk increases during periods of dehydration due to diarrhoea, vomiting or fever (so-called “sick days”), or high environmental temperatures (heat wave). This study aims to gain insight into the characteristics and preventability of medication-related admissions for AKI and dehydration in elderly patients. Methods: Retrospective case series study in patients aged ≥ 65 years with admission for acute kidney injury, dehydration or electrolyte imbalance related to dehydration that was defined as medication-related. General practitioner’s (GP) patient records including medication history and hospital discharge letters were available. For each admission, patient and admission characteristics were collected to review the patient journey. A case-by-case assessment of preventability of hospital admissions was performed. Results: In total, 75 admissions were included. Most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension, diabetes, and known impaired renal function. Diuretics and RAS-inhibitors were the most prevalent medication combination. Eighty percent of patients experienced non-acute onset of symptoms and 60% had contacted their GP within 2 weeks prior to admission. Around 40% (n = 29) of admissions were considered potentially preventable if pharmacotherapy had been timely and adequately adjusted. Conclusion: A substantial proportion of patients admitted with AKI or dehydration experience non-acute onset of symptoms and had contacted their GP within 2 weeks prior to admission. Timely adjusting of medication in these patients could have potentially prevented a considerable number of admissions

Non-dispensing pharmacist integrated in the primary care team:Effect on the quality of physician's prescribing, a non-randomised comparative study

BackgroundEspecially in elderly with polypharmacy, medication can do harm. Clinical pharmacists integrated in primary care teams might improve quality of pharmaceutical care.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of non-dispensing clinical pharmacists integrated in primary care teams on general practitioners' prescribing quality.SettingThis study was conducted in 25 primary care practices in the Netherlands.MethodsNon-randomised, controlled, multi-centre, complex intervention study with pre-post comparison. First, we identified potential prescribing quality indicators from the literature and assessed their feasibility, validity, acceptability, reliability and sensitivity to change. Also, an expert panel assessed the indicators' health impact. Next, using the final set of indicators, we measured the quality of prescribing in practices where non-dispensing pharmacists were integrated in the team (intervention group) compared to usual care (two control groups). Data were extracted anonymously from the healthcare records. Comparisons were made using mixed models correcting for potential confounders.Main outcome measureQuality of prescribing, measured with prescribing quality indicators.ResultsOf 388 eligible indicators reported in the literature we selected 8. In addition, two more indicators relevant for Dutch general practice were formulated by an expert panel. Scores on all 10 indicators improved in the intervention group after introduction of the non-dispensing pharmacist. However, when compared to control groups, prescribing quality improved solely on the indicator measuring monitoring of the renal function in patients using antihypertensive medication: relative risk of a monitored renal function in the intervention group compared to usual care: 1.03 (95% CI 1.01-1.05, p-value 0.010) and compared to usual care plus: 1.04 (1.01-1.06, p-value 0.004).ConclusionThis study did not demonstrate a consistent effect of the introduction of non-dispensing clinical pharmacists in the primary care team on the quality of physician's prescribing. This study is part of the POINT-study, which was registered at The Netherlands National Trial Register with trial registration number NTR-4389

Pharmacists’ current and potential prescribing roles in primary care in the Netherlands: a case study

In some countries, pharmacists have obtained prescribing rights to improve quality and accessibility of care and reduce physician workload. This case study explored pharmacists’ current roles in and potential for prescribing in primary care in the Netherlands, where prescribing rights for pharmacists do not exist. Participatory observations of pharmacists working in either general practice or community pharmacy were conducted, as were semi-structured interviews about current and potential practice. The latter were extended to patients and other healthcare professionals, mainly general practitioners, resulting in 34 interviews in total. Thematic analyses revealed that pharmacists, in all cases, wrote prescriptions that were then authorized by a physician before dispensing. General practice-based pharmacists often prescribed medications during patient consultations. Community pharmacists mainly influenced prescribing through (a) medication reviews where the physician and/or practice nurse often were consulted to make treatment decisions, and (b) collaborative agreements with physicians to start or substitute medications in specific situations. These findings imply that the pharmacists’ current roles in prescribing in the Netherlands resemble collaborative prescribing practices in other countries. We also identified several issues that should be addressed before formally introducing pharmacist prescribing, such as definitions of tasks and responsibilities and prescribing-specific training for pharmacists