Strategies to prevent potentially inappropriate prescribing and adverse drug reactions in older patients

INTRODUCTION: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is a major contributor to adverse drug reactions and overall increased healthcare costs. The aim of this thesis was to identify, develop and implement strategies with the potential to prevent PIP and ADRs in older patients. METHODS: A systematic review of the qualitative literature (Meta-synthesis); A qualitative study in Irish hospitals; A randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the impact of an online educational module on doctors’ prescribing knowledge and confidence; Exploration of the potential for a frailty index score to enable doctors identify patients at increased risk of PIP and ADRs; Exploration of the potential for the SHiM tool to enable doctors to optimise prescribing for older patients. RESULTS: The meta-synthesis identified four key concepts: (i) Desire to please the patient; (ii) Feeling of being forced to prescribe; (iii) Tension between experience and guidelines; (iv) Prescriber fear. Similar themes also emerged from the qualitative study. In the RCT, the online educational module resulted in a highly significant 22% difference in test scores between intervention and control groups. The studies exploring the frailty index score showed a significant positive relationship between a patient’s frailty status and their likelihood of experiencing PIP/ADRs. Patients above a frailty threshold of 0.16 were at least twice as likely to experience PIP/ADRs. SHiM was found to be a useful tool in terms of reconciling patients’ medications. However, the evidence for it being capable of preventing clinically relevant adverse events was poor. CONCLUSION:Qualitative research in this thesis has proposed novel theories relating to the causative factors of PIP in older patients. In doing so, it has identified several areas for intervention and laid down a road map for future research

Factors affecting prescriber implementation of computer-generated medication recommendations in the SENATOR trial: A qualitative study

Background: The SENATOR trial intervention included the provision of computer-generated medication recommendations to physician prescribers caring for hospitalised older adults (≥ 65 years), with the aim of reducing in-hospital adverse drug reactions. Interim data analysis during the trial revealed that the prescriber implementation rates of the computer-generated STOPP/START recommendations were lower than expected across all six trial sites. Aim: The aim of this qualitative study was to identify the factors affecting prescriber implementation of the medication recommendations in the SENATOR trial. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with trial researchers and physician prescribers who were provided with SENATOR recommendations. Content analysis was used to identify the most relevant domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) that affected recommendation uptake. Results: Ten trial researchers and fourteen prescribers were interviewed across the six trial sites. Eight TDF domains were found to be most relevant in affecting prescriber implementation: ‘environmental context and resources’, ‘goals’, ‘intentions’, ‘knowledge’, ‘beliefs about consequences’, ‘memory, attention and decision processes’, ‘social/professional role and identity’, and ‘social influences’. Interviewees felt that there was often a disconnect between the time prescribers were reviewing the patient and the point at which the recommendations were provided. However, when recommendations were reviewed, prescriber inertia was highly pervasive, with a particular reluctance to make pharmacotherapy changes outside their own specialty. Implementation was facilitated by recommendations reaching a ‘decision-maker’, but this was often not possible as the software could not evaluate the entire clinical context of patients, and thus frequently produced recommendations of low clinical relevance. Conclusion: This study has demonstrated that the clinical relevance of the SENATOR prescribing recommendations was a significant factor affecting their implementation. Whilst software refinement will be necessary to improve the quality of recommendations, future interventions will need to be multifaceted to overcome the complex prescriber specialty culture within the acute hospital environment

Development of a standardized chart review method to identify drug-related hospital admissions in older people

Aim: We aimed to develop a standardized chart review method to identify drug-related hospital admissions (DRA) in older people caused by non-preventable adverse drug reactions and preventable medication errors including overuse, underuse and misuse of medications: the DRA adjudication guide. Methods: The DRA adjudication guide was developed based on design and test iterations with international and multidisciplinary input in 4 subsequent steps: literature review, evaluation of content validity using a Delphi consensus technique, a pilot test and a reliability study. Results: The DRA adjudication guide provides definitions, examples and step-by-step instructions to measure DRA. A 3-step standardized chart review method was elaborated including 1) data abstraction, 2) explicit screening with a newly developed trigger tool for DRA in older people and 3) consensus adjudication for causality by a pharmacist and a physician using the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre and Hallas criteria. A 15-member international Delphi panel reached consensus agreement on 26 triggers for DRA in older people. The DRA adjudication guide showed good feasibility of use and achieved moderate inter-rater reliability for the evaluation of 16 cases by 4 European adjudication pairs (71% agreement, kappa = 0.41). Disagreements arose mainly for cases with potential underuse. Conclusions: The DRA adjudication guide is the first standardized chart review method to identify DRA in older persons. Content validity, feasibility of use and inter-rater reliability were found to be satisfactory. The method can be used as an outcome measure for interventions targeted at improving quality and safety of medication use in older people

The impact of health information technology on prescribing errors in hospitals: a systematic review and behaviour change technique analysis

Background: Health information technology (HIT) is known to reduce prescribing errors but may also cause new types of technology-generated errors (TGE) related to data entry, duplicate prescribing, and prescriber alert fatigue. It is unclear which component behaviour change techniques (BCTs) contribute to the effectiveness of prescribing HIT implementations and optimisation. This study aimed to (i) quantitatively assess the HIT that reduces prescribing errors in hospitals and (ii) identify the BCTs associated with effective interventions.Methods: Articles were identified using CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science to May 2020. Eligible studies compared prescribing HIT with paper-order entry and examined prescribing error rates. Studies were excluded if prescribing error rates could not be extracted, if HIT use was non-compulsory or designed for one class of medication. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess study quality. The review was reported in accordance with the PRISMA and SWiM guidelines. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated across the studies. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise effect estimates. Two researchers examined studies for BCTs using a validated taxonomy. Effectiveness ratios (ER) were used to determine the potential impact of individual BCTs.Results: Thirty-five studies of variable risk of bias and limited intervention reporting were included. TGE were identified in 31 studies. Compared with paper-order entry, prescribing HIT of varying sophistication was associated with decreased rates of prescribing errors (median OR 0.24, IQR 0.03-0.57). Ten BCTs were present in at least two successful interventions and may be effective components of prescribing HIT implementation and optimisation including prescriber involvement in system design, clinical colleagues as trainers, modification of HIT in response to feedback, direct observation of prescriber workflow, monitoring of electronic orders to detect errors, and system alerts that prompt the prescriber.Conclusions: Prescribing HIT is associated with a reduction in prescribing errors in a variety of hospital settings. Poor reporting of intervention delivery and content limited the BCT analysis. More detailed reporting may have identified additional effective intervention components. Effective BCTs may be considered in the design and development of prescribing HIT and in the reporting and evaluation of future studies in this area.</p

Implementation of Telemedicine Consultations for People with Mental Health Conditions in the Community: A Protocol for a Systematic Review

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic response has led to an exponential increase in the use and spread of telemedicine internationally. In community mental health care settings, telemedicine services were implemented within a few weeks, with little time for rigorous planning. Despite the reported acceptability of telemedicine by patients and clinicians, barriers to its implementation have come to light. There is now a need to investigate these barriers, and facilitators, as telemedicine begins to show potential promise beyond the pandemic. We propose a review that aims to identify the factors affecting the implementation of telemedicine consultations for patients with mental health conditions in the community. Methods: A systematic review will be conducted and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. Five electronic databases will be searched using a pre-defined search strategy from 2016 to 2021. Only studies of synchronous, interactive telemedicine consultations conducted via video, phone or live messaging between patients and providers will be included. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies will be eligible for inclusion. Only studies published in the English language will be included. Titles and abstracts will be screened by two reviewers. Full text articles will be screened by two reviewers. The methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) by two reviewers. Data will be extracted and tabulated to address the aims of the review. A narrative synthesis will be conducted and reported factors will be mapped to the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Conclusion: By identifying the factors that influence the implementation of telemedicine consultations for patients with mental conditions in the community, consideration can be given to both barriers and facilitators that could be addressed in future mental health services planning. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021273422 (04/10/2021

Patient and provider perspectives of the implementation of remote consultations for community-dwelling people with mental health conditions: A systematic mixed studies review

Remote, or tele-, consultations became a necessary form of mental healthcare provision during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the prevalence of mental health problems rises, they may have a role in future mental health services. We aimed to review the literature on patient and provider perspectives on factors influencing the implementation of remote consultations for community-dwelling people with mental health conditions. We searched five electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) for empirical research up to July 13th, 2022. Only studies of synchronous, interactive remote consultations conducted via video, phone, or live-messaging between patients and providers were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. We integrated qualitative and quantitative data from 39 studies into a single mixed-methods synthesis. We mapped reported factors to the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Acceptability was generally high among participants, despite concerns about the quality of care and the perceived impeded therapeutic relationship. A prominent facilitator was the increased accessibility and convenience of remote consultations, while lack of appropriate infrastructure and low patient comfort and competence were among the most prevalent barriers. This review highlights the importance of patient preferences and provider buy-in to the future of remote consultations

Stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation of remote mental health consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study

Background: Remote mental health consultations were swiftly implemented across mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research has begun to inform future design and delivery of telemental health services. Exploring the in-depth experiences of those involved is important to understand the complex, multi-level factors that influence the implementation of remote mental health consultations. The aim of this study was to explore stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation of remote mental health consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted whereby semi-structured, individual interviews were undertaken with mental health providers, service users, and managers (n = 19) to acquire rich information. Interviews were conducted between November 2021 and July 2022. The interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were analysed thematically using a deductive and inductive approach. Results: Six themes were identified. The advantages of remote mental health consultations were described, including convenience and increased accessibility to care. Providers and managers described varying levels of success with implementation, citing complexity and incompatibility with existing workflows as barriers to adoption. Providers' access to resources, guidance, and training were notable facilitators. Participants perceived remote mental health consultations to be satisfactory but not equivalent to in-person care in terms of quality. Views about the inferior quality of remote consultations stemmed from beliefs about the inhibited therapeutic relationship and a possible reduction in effectiveness compared to in-person care. Whilst a return to in-person services was mostly preferred, participants acknowledged a potential adjunct role for remote consultations in certain circumstances. Conclusions: Remote mental health consultations were welcomed as a means to continue care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their swift and necessary adoption placed pressure on providers and organisations to adapt quickly, navigating challenges and adjusting to a new way of working. This implementation created changes to workflows and dynamics that disrupted the traditional method of mental health care delivery. Further consideration of the importance of the therapeutic relationship and fostering positive provider beliefs and feelings of competence are needed to ensure satisfactory and effective implementation of remote mental health consultations going forward.</p

Implementation of telemedicine consultations for people with mental health conditions in the community: a protocol for a systematic review [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic response has led to an exponential increase in the use and spread of telemedicine internationally. In community mental health care settings, telemedicine services were implemented within a few weeks, with little time for rigorous planning. Despite the reported acceptability of telemedicine by patients and clinicians, barriers to its implementation have come to light. There is now a need to investigate these barriers, and facilitators, as telemedicine begins to show potential promise beyond the pandemic. We propose a review that aims to identify the factors affecting the implementation of telemedicine consultations for patients with mental health conditions in the community.  Methods: A systematic review will be conducted and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. Five electronic databases will be searched using a pre-defined search strategy from 2016 to 2021. Only studies of synchronous, interactive telemedicine consultations conducted via video, phone or live messaging between patients and providers will be included. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies will be eligible for inclusion. Only studies published in the English language will be included. Titles and abstracts will be screened by two reviewers. Full text articles will be screened by two reviewers. The methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) by two reviewers. Data will be extracted and tabulated to address the aims of the review. A narrative synthesis will be conducted and reported factors will be mapped to the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).  Conclusion: By identifying the factors that influence the implementation of telemedicine consultations for patients with mental conditions in the community, consideration can be given to both barriers and facilitators that could be addressed in future mental health services planning.  PROSPERO registration: CRD42021273422 (04/10/2021)</p