A feasibility study of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy for older people in primary care

Background: A general practitioner (GP)-targeted intervention aimed at improving the prescribing of appropriate polypharmacy for older people was previously developed using a systematic, theory-based approach based on the UK Medical Research Council’s complex intervention framework. The primary intervention component comprised a video demonstration of a GP prescribing appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient. The video was delivered to GPs online and included feedback emphasising the positive outcomes of performing the behaviour. As a complementary intervention component, patients were invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. This study aimed to test the feasibility of the intervention and study procedures (recruitment, data collection). Methods: GPs from two general practices were given access to the video, and reception staff scheduled consultations with older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥4 medicines). Primary feasibility study outcomes were the usability and acceptability of the intervention to GPs. Feedback was collected from GP and patient participants using structured questionnaires. Clinical data were also extracted from recruited patients’ medical records (baseline and 1 month post-consultation). The feasibility of applying validated assessment of prescribing appropriateness (STOPP/ START criteria, Medication Appropriateness Index) and medication regimen complexity (Medication Regimen Complexity Index) to these data was investigated. Data analysis was descriptive, providing an overview of participants’ feedback and clinical assessment findings. Results: Four GPs and ten patients were recruited across two practices. The intervention was considered usable and acceptable by GPs. Some reservations were expressed by GPs as to whether the video truly reflected resource and time pressures encountered in the general practice working environment. Patient feedback on the scheduled consultations was positive. Patients welcomed the opportunity to have their medications reviewed. Due to the short time to follow-up and a lack of detailed clinical information in patient records, it was not feasible to detect any prescribing changes or to apply the assessment tools to patients’ clinical data. Conclusion: The findings will help to further refine the intervention and study procedures (including time to follow-up) which will be tested in a randomised pilot study that will inform the design of a definitive trial to evaluate the intervention’s effectiveness

Target enzyme mutations are the molecular basis for resistance towards pharmacological inhibition of nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Inhibitors of nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase (NAMPT) are promising cancer drugs currently in clinical trials in oncology, including APO866, CHS-828 and the CHS-828 prodrug EB1627/GMX1777, but cancer cell resistance to these drugs has not been studied in detail.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Here, we introduce an analogue of CHS-828 called TP201565 with increased potency in cellular assays. Further, we describe and characterize a panel of cell lines with acquired stable resistance towards several NAMPT inhibitors of 18 to 20,000 fold compared to their parental cell lines.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We find that 4 out of 5 of the resistant sublines display mutations of NAMPT located in the vicinity of the active site or in the dimer interface of NAMPT. Furthermore, we show that these mutations are responsible for the resistance observed. All the resistant cell lines formed xenograft tumours <it>in vivo</it>. Also, we confirm CHS-828 and TP201565 as competitive inhibitors of NAMPT through docking studies and by NAMPT precipitation from cellular lysate by an analogue of TP201565 linked to sepharose. The NAMPT precipitation could be inhibited by addition of APO866.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We found that CHS-828 and TP201565 are competitive inhibitors of NAMPT and that acquired resistance towards NAMPT inhibitors can be expected primarily to be caused by mutations in NAMPT.</p

Dopaminergic and Serotonergic Drug Use: A Nationwide Register-Based Study of Over 1 300 000 Older People

Objective: To investigate the use of dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs in elderly people. Methods: We analyzed data on age, sex and dispensed drugs for individuals aged $65 years registered in the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register from July to September 2008 (n = 1 347 564; 81$65 years in Sweden). Main outcome measures were dopaminergic (enhancing and/or lowering) and serotonergic (enhancing and/or lowering) drugs and combinations of these. Results: Dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs were used by 5.6 % and 13.2 % the participants, respectively. Female gender was related to use of both dopaminergic and, particularly, serotonergic drugs. Higher age was associated with use of dopamine lowering drugs and serotonergic drugs, whereas the association with use of dopamine enhancing drugs declined in the oldest old. The occurrence of combinations of dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs was generally low, with dopamine lowering + serotonin lowering drug the most common combination (1.6%). Female gender was associated with all of the combinations of dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs, whereas age showed a mixed pattern. Conclusion: Approximately one out of ten older patients uses serotonergic drugs and one out of twenty dopaminergic drugs. The frequent use of dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs in the elderly patients is a potential problem due to the fact that aging is associated with a down-regulation of both these monoaminergic systems. Future studies are needed fo

Development of an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care using a theory-based method

BACKGROUND: It is advocated that interventions to improve clinical practice should be developed using a systematic approach and intervention development methods should be reported. However, previous interventions aimed at ensuring that older people receive appropriate polypharmacy have lacked details on their development. This study formed part of a multiphase research project which aimed to develop an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. METHODS: The target behaviours for the intervention were prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older patients by general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists. Intervention development followed a systematic approach, including previous mapping of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to key domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework that were perceived by GPs and pharmacists to influence the target behaviours. Draft interventions were developed to operationalise selected BCTs through team discussion. Selection of an intervention for feasibility testing was guided by a subset of the APEASE (Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness/cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects/safety, Equity) criteria. RESULTS: Three draft interventions comprising selected BCTs were developed, targeting patients, pharmacists and GPs, respectively. Following assessment of each intervention using a subset of the APEASE criteria (affordability, practicability, acceptability), the GP-targeted intervention was selected for feasibility testing. This intervention will involve a demonstration of the behaviour and will be delivered as an online video. The video demonstrating how GPs can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a typical consultation with an older patient will also demonstrate salience of consequences (feedback emphasising the positive outcomes of performing the behaviour). Action plans and prompts/cues will be used as complementary intervention components. The intervention is designed to facilitate the prescribing of appropriate polypharmacy in routine practice. CONCLUSION: A GP-targeted intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people has been developed using a systematic approach. Intervention content has been specified using an established taxonomy of BCTs and selected to maximise feasibility. The results of a future feasibility study will help to determine if the theory-based intervention requires further refinement before progressing to a larger scale randomised evaluation

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

Dopaminergic and Serotonergic Drug Use: A Nationwide Register-Based Study of Over 1 300 000 Older People

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the use of dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs in elderly people. METHODS: We analyzed data on age, sex and dispensed drugs for individuals aged ≥65 years registered in the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register from July to September 2008 (n = 1,347,564; 81% of the total population aged ≥65 years in Sweden). Main outcome measures were dopaminergic (enhancing and/or lowering) and serotonergic (enhancing and/or lowering) drugs and combinations of these. RESULTS: Dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs were used by 5.6% and 13.2% the participants, respectively. Female gender was related to use of both dopaminergic and, particularly, serotonergic drugs. Higher age was associated with use of dopamine lowering drugs and serotonergic drugs, whereas the association with use of dopamine enhancing drugs declined in the oldest old. The occurrence of combinations of dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs was generally low, with dopamine lowering + serotonin lowering drug the most common combination (1.6%). Female gender was associated with all of the combinations of dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs, whereas age showed a mixed pattern. CONCLUSION: Approximately one out of ten older patients uses serotonergic drugs and one out of twenty dopaminergic drugs. The frequent use of dopaminergic and serotonergic drugs in the elderly patients is a potential problem due to the fact that aging is associated with a down-regulation of both these monoaminergic systems. Future studies are needed for evaluation of the impact of these drugs on different cognitive and emotional functions in old age