Prevalence, prescribing and barriers to effective management of hypertension in older populations: a narrative review.

OBJECTIVES: Hypertension is the leading modifiable cause of mortality worldwide. Unlike many conditions where limited evidence exists for management of older individuals, multiple large, robust trials have provided a solid evidence-base regarding the management of hypertension in older adults. Understanding the impact of age on how the prevalence of hypertension and the role of pharmacotherapy in managing hypertension among older persons is a critical element is the provision of optimal health care for older populations. The aim of this study was to explore how the prevalence of hypertension changes with age, the evidence regarding pharmacological management in older adults and to identify known barriers to the optimal management of hypertension in older patients. METHODS: A review of English language studies published prior to 2013 in Medline, Embase and Google scholar was conducted. Key search terms included hypertension, pharmacotherapy, and aged. RESULTS: The prevalence of hypertension was shown to increase with age, however there is good evidence for the use of a number of pharmacological agents to control blood pressure in older populations. System, physician and patient related barriers to optimal blood pressure control were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Despite good evidence for pharmacological management of hypertension among olderpopulations, under treatment of hypertension is an issue. Concerns regarding adverse effects appearcentral to under treatment of hypertension among older populations

Defining constipation to estimate its prevalence in the community: Results from a national survey

© 2019 The Author(s). Background: Different definitions of constipation have been used to estimate its prevalence in the community but this creates difficulties when comparing results from various studies. This study explores the impact of different definitions on prevalence estimates in the same population and compares the performance of simple definitions with the Rome III criteria. Methods: The prevalence of constipation in a large nationally representative sample of community-dwelling adults was estimated using five simple definitions of constipation and compared with definitions based on the Rome III criteria. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values, were calculated for each definition using the Rome III criteria as the gold standards for chronic and sub-chronic constipation. Results: Prevalence estimates for the five simple definitions ranged from 9.4 to 58.9%, while the prevalence estimates using the Rome III criteria were 24.0% (95%CI: 22.1, 25.9) for chronic constipation and 39.6% (95%CI: 37.5, 41.7) for sub-chronic constipation. None of the simple definitions were adequate compared to the Rome III criteria. Self-reported constipation over the past 12 months had the highest sensitivity (91.1%, 95%CI: 88.8, 93.4) and negative predictive value (94.5%, 95%CI: 93.1, 96.1) compared to the Rome III criteria for chronic constipation but an unacceptably low specificity (51.3%, 95%CI: 48.8, 53.8) and positive predictive value (37.1%, 95%CI: 34.4, 39.9). Conclusions: The definition used to identify constipation within a population has a considerable impact on the prevalence estimate obtained. Simple definitions, commonly used in research, performed poorly compared with the Rome III criteria. Studies estimating population prevalence of constipation should use definitions based on the Rome criteria where possible

A systematic review of the prevalence and risk factors for adverse drug reactions in the elderly in the acute care setting

© 2014 Alhawassi et al. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are an important health issue. While prevalence and risk factors associated with ADRs in the general adult population have been well documented, much less is known about ADRs in the elderly population. The aim of this study was to review the published literature to estimate the prevalence of ADRs in the elderly in the acute care setting and identify factors associated with an increased risk of an ADR in the elderly. A systematic review of studies published between 2003 and 2013 was conducted in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, Google Scholar and MEDLINE. Key search terms included: “adverse drug reactions”, “adverse effects”, “elderly patients and hospital admission”, “drug therapy”, “drug adverse effects”, “drug related”, “aged”, “older patients”, “geriatric”, “hospitalization”, and “emergency admissions”. For inclusion in the review, studies had to focus on ADRs in the elderly and had to include an explicit definition of what was considered an ADR and/or an explicit assessment of causality, and a clear description of the method used for ADR identification, and had to describe factors associated with an increased risk of an ADR. Fourteen hospital-based observational studies exploring ADRs in the elderly in the acute care setting were eligible for inclusion in this review. The mean prevalence of ADRs in the elderly in the studies included in this review was 11.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.1%–16.8%). The median prevalence of ADRs leading to hospitalization was 10.0% (95% CI: 7.2%–12.8%), while the prevalence of ADRs occurring during hospitalization was 11.5% (95% CI: 0%–27.7%). There was wide variation in the overall ADR prevalence, from 5.8% to 46.3%. Female sex, increased comorbid complexity, and increased number of medications were all significantly associated with an increased risk of an ADR. Retrospective studies and those relying on identification by the usual treating team reported lower prevalence rates. From this review, we can conclude that ADRs constitute a significant health issue for the elderly in the acute care setting. While there was wide variation in the prevalence of ADRs in the elderly, based on the findings of this study, at least one in ten elderly patients will experience an ADR leading to or during their hospital stay. Older female patients and those with multiple comorbidities and medications appear to be at the highest risk of an ADR in the acute care setting

Potential for Detection of Safety Signals for Over-the-Counter Medicines Using National ADR Spontaneous Reporting Data: The Example of OTC NSAID-Associated Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

One post-marketing surveillance challenge for many regulatory authorities is access to information regarding the safety of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. National spontaneous adverse drug reaction (ADR) report data represent a rich potential data source for the detection of safety signals associated with OTC medicines, yet little is known regarding the possibility of detecting safety signals for OTC medicines within these datasets. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential for detecting safety signals for OTC medicines in National ADR spontaneous reporting data, using OTC non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and gastrointestinal bleeding as an example. Data from the Australian Adverse Drug Reactions System (ADRS) dataset (1971-2008) and the Canadian Vigilance Adverse Reaction Online Database (VAROD) (1965-2013) were used to explore the feasibility of using spontaneous reporting data, exploring the association between gastrointestinal bleeding and the use of OTC NSAIDs. Safety signals were examined using disproportionality analyses and reporting odds ratios calculated. After adjusting for age, gender, medications known to increase the risk of bleeding, and medications used for the management of conditions associated with an increased risk of bleeding, a two-fold increase in the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding with OTC NSAID was observed within each dataset. This study demonstrates that spontaneous ADR reporting data can be used in pharmacovigilance to monitor the safety of OTC medicines

Reducing the anticholinergic and sedative load in older patients on polypharmacy by pharmacist-led medication review: A randomised controlled trial

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. Objective To evaluate if a pharmacist-led medication review is effective at reducing the anticholinergic/sedative load, as measured by the Drug Burden Index (DBI). Design Randomised controlled single blind trial. Setting 15 community pharmacies in the Northern Netherlands. Participants 157 community-dwelling patients aged ≥65 years who used ≥5 medicines for ≥3 months, including at least one psycholeptic/psychoanaleptic medication and who had a DBI≥1. Intervention A medication review by the community pharmacist in collaboration with the patient's general practitioner and patient. Primary and secondary outcomes measures The primary outcome was the proportion of patients whose DBI decreased by at least 0.5. Secondary outcomes were the presence of anticholinergic/sedative side effects, falls, cognitive function, activities of daily living, quality of life, hospital admission and mortality. Data were collected at baseline and 3 months follow-up. Results Mean participant age was 75.7 (SD, 6.9) years in the intervention arm and 76.6 (SD, 6.7) years in the control arm, the majority were female (respectively 69.3% and 72.0%). Logistic regression analysis showed no difference in the proportion of patients with a≥0.5 decrease in DBI between intervention arm (17.3%) and control arm (15.9%), (OR 1.04, CI 0.47 to 2.64, p=0.927). Intervention patients scored higher on the Digit Symbol Substitution Test, measure of cognitive function (OR 2.02, CI 1.11 to 3.67, p=0.021) and reported fewer sedative side effects (OR 0.61, CI 0.40 to 0.94, p=0.024) at follow-up. No significant difference was found for other secondary outcomes. Conclusions Pharmacist-led medication review as currently performed in the Netherlands was not effective in reducing the anticholinergic/sedative load, measured with the DBI, within the time frame of 3 months. Preventive strategies, signalling a rising load and taking action before chronic use of anticholinergic/sedative medication is established may be more successful. Trial registration number NCT02317666

Automation bias in electronic prescribing

© 2017 The Author(s). Background: Clinical decision support (CDS) in e-prescribing can improve safety by alerting potential errors, but introduces new sources of risk. Automation bias (AB) occurs when users over-rely on CDS, reducing vigilance in information seeking and processing. Evidence of AB has been found in other clinical tasks, but has not yet been tested with e-prescribing. This study tests for the presence of AB in e-prescribing and the impact of task complexity and interruptions on AB. Methods: One hundred and twenty students in the final two years of a medical degree prescribed medicines for nine clinical scenarios using a simulated e-prescribing system. Quality of CDS (correct, incorrect and no CDS) and task complexity (low, low + interruption and high) were varied between conditions. Omission errors (failure to detect prescribing errors) and commission errors (acceptance of false positive alerts) were measured. Results: Compared to scenarios with no CDS, correct CDS reduced omission errors by 38.3% (p < .0001, n = 120), 46.6% (p < .0001, n = 70), and 39.2% (p < .0001, n = 120) for low, low + interrupt and high complexity scenarios respectively. Incorrect CDS increased omission errors by 33.3% (p < .0001, n = 120), 24.5% (p < .009, n = 82), and 26.7% (p < .0001, n = 120). Participants made commission errors, 65.8% (p < .0001, n = 120), 53.5% (p < .0001, n = 82), and 51.7% (p < .0001, n = 120). Task complexity and interruptions had no impact on AB. Conclusions: This study found evidence of AB omission and commission errors in e-prescribing. Verification of CDS alerts is key to avoiding AB errors. However, interventions focused on this have had limited success to date. Clinicians should remain vigilant to the risks of CDS failures and verify CDS

Relationship between guideline treatment and health-related quality of life in asthma

The aim of this study was to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQL) of asthma patients treated according to the 1997 National Institute of Health (NIH) international asthma guideline and that of asthmatics receiving non-guideline treatment. The suitability of 146 asthmatics' medication regimes was determined according to the 1997 NIH asthma guideline. Quality of life was assessed on a seven-point scale using the Asthma Quality of Life questionnaire. Just over half of the patients were not currently using the treatment considered necessary for controlling their asthma. Patients treated according to the guideline (n=72) had a significantly higher overall HRQL than patients with non-guideline treatment (5.7 versus 5.3). The differences were also significant for the subscales measuring symptoms and environmental exposure, but not for activities or emotional function. An association between non-guideline treatment and a poorer health-related quality of life in asthma patients treated in general practice was observed. This study supports the role of evidence-based guidelines in daily practice. Further studies are needed to determine if guideline treatment is responsible for the increase in health-related quality of life observed in this work