Epidemiology and association with outcomes of polypharmacy in patients undergoing surgery: retrospective, population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of preoperative polypharmacy and the incidence of postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy in surgical patients and their association with adverse outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study among patients older than or equal to 18 years undergoing surgery at a university hospital between 2005 and 2018. Patients were categorized based on the number of medications: non-polypharmacy (fewer than 5); polypharmacy (5-9); and hyper-polypharmacy (greater than or equal to 10). The 30-day mortality, prolonged hospitalization (greater than or equal to 10 days), and incidence of readmission were compared between medication-use categories. RESULTS: Among 55 997 patients, the prevalence of preoperative polypharmacy was 32.3 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 33.5 to 34.3) and the prevalence of hyper-polypharmacy was 25.5 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 25.2 to 25.9). Thirty-day mortality was higher for patients exposed to preoperative hyper-polypharmacy (2.3 per cent) and preoperative polypharmacy (0.8 per cent) compared with those exposed to non-polypharmacy (0.6 per cent) (P < 0.001). The hazards ratio (HR) of long-term mortality was higher for patients exposed to hyper-polypharmacy (HR 1.32 (95 per cent c.i. 1.25 to 1.40)) and polypharmacy (HR 1.07 (95 per cent c.i. 1.01 to 1.14)) after adjustment for patient and procedural variables. The incidence of longer hospitalization (greater than or equal to 10 days) was higher for hyper-polypharmacy (11.3 per cent) and polypharmacy (6.3 per cent) compared with non-polypharmacy (4.1 per cent) (P < 0.001). The 30-day incidence of readmission was higher for patients exposed to hyper-polypharmacy (10.2 per cent) compared with polypharmacy (6.1 per cent) and non-polypharmacy (4.8 per cent) (P < 0.001). Among patients not exposed to polypharmacy, the incidence of new postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy was 33.4 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 32.8 to 34.1), and, for patients exposed to preoperative polypharmacy, the incidence of postoperative hyper-polypharmacy was 16.3 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 16.0 to 16.7). CONCLUSION: Preoperative polypharmacy and new postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy are common and associated with adverse outcomes. This highlights the need for increased emphasis on optimizing medication usage throughout the perioperative interval

Medication-related harm in older adults following hospital discharge: development and validation of a prediction tool

Objectives: To develop and validate a tool to predict the risk of an older adult experiencing medication-related harm (MRH) requiring healthcare use following hospital discharge. Design, setting, participants: Multicentre, prospective cohort study recruiting older adults (65 years) discharged from five UK teaching hospitals between 2013 and 2015. Primary outcome measure: Participants were followed up for 8 weeks in the community by senior pharmacists to identify MRH (adverse drug reactions, harm from non-adherence, harm from medication error). Three data sources provided MRH and healthcare use information; hospital readmissions, primary care use, participant telephone interview. Candidate variables for prognostic modelling were selected using two systematic reviews, the views of patients with MRH, and an expert panel of clinicians. Multivariable logistic regression with backward elimination, based on the Akaike Information Criterion, was used to develop the PRIME tool. The tool was internally validated. Results: 1116 out of 1280 recruited participants completed follow-up (87%). Uncertain MRH cases (‘possible’ and ‘probable’) were excluded, leaving a tool derivation cohort of 818. 119 (15%) participants experienced ‘definite’ MRH requiring healthcare use and 699 participants did not. Modelling resulted in a prediction tool with eight variables measured at hospital discharge; age, gender, antiplatelet drug, sodium level, antidiabetic drug, past adverse drug reaction, number of medicines, living alone. The tool’s discrimination C-statistic was 0.69 (0.66 after validation) and showed good calibration. Decision curve analysis demonstrated the potential value of the tool to guide clinical decision making compared with alternative approaches. Conclusions: The PRIME tool could be used to identify older patients at high risk of MRH requiring healthcare use following hospital discharge. Prior to clinical use we recommend the tool’s evaluation in other settings

Echinacea purpurea Significantly Induces Cytochrome P450 3A Activity but Does Not Alter Lopinavir‐Ritonavir Exposure in Healthy Subjects

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90291/1/phco.30.8.797.pd

Epidemiology and association with outcomes of polypharmacy in patients undergoing surgery : retrospective, population-based cohort study

© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. Funding Information: This work was supported by the Foundation of St Josef’s Hospital in cooperation with the Icelandic Gerontological Research Centre, the National University Hospital of Iceland (to F.J.), the Landspitali University Hospital Science Fund (to M.I.S.), and the University of Iceland Research Fund (to F.J.). Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.Background: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of preoperative polypharmacy and the incidence of postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy in surgical patients and their association with adverse outcomes. Methods: This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study among patients older than or equal to 18 years undergoing surgery at a university hospital between 2005 and 2018. Patients were categorized based on the number of medications: non-polypharmacy (fewer than 5); polypharmacy (5–9); and hyper-polypharmacy (greater than or equal to 10). The 30-day mortality, prolonged hospitalization (greater than or equal to 10 days), and incidence of readmission were compared between medication-use categories. Results: Among 55 997 patients, the prevalence of preoperative polypharmacy was 32.3 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 33.5 to 34.3) and the prevalence of hyper-polypharmacy was 25.5 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 25.2 to 25.9). Thirty-day mortality was higher for patients exposed to preoperative hyper-polypharmacy (2.3 per cent) and preoperative polypharmacy (0.8 per cent) compared with those exposed to non-polypharmacy (0.6 per cent) (P < 0.001). The hazards ratio (HR) of long-term mortality was higher for patients exposed to hyper-polypharmacy (HR 1.32 (95 per cent c.i. 1.25 to 1.40)) and polypharmacy (HR 1.07 (95 per cent c.i. 1.01 to 1.14)) after adjustment for patient and procedural variables. The incidence of longer hospitalization (greater than or equal to 10 days) was higher for hyper-polypharmacy (11.3 per cent) and polypharmacy (6.3 per cent) compared with non-polypharmacy (4.1 per cent) (P < 0.001). The 30-day incidence of readmission was higher for patients exposed to hyper-polypharmacy (10.2 per cent) compared with polypharmacy (6.1 per cent) and non-polypharmacy (4.8 per cent) (P < 0.001). Among patients not exposed to polypharmacy, the incidence of new postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy was 33.4 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 32.8 to 34.1), and, for patients exposed to preoperative polypharmacy, the incidence of postoperative hyper-polypharmacy was 16.3 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 16.0 to 16.7). Conclusion: Preoperative polypharmacy and new postoperative polypharmacy/hyper-polypharmacy are common and associated with adverse outcomes. This highlights the need for increased emphasis on optimizing medication usage throughout the perioperative interval.Peer reviewe

'A bite before bed': exposure to malaria vectors outside the times of net use in the highlands of western Kenya.

BACKGROUND: The human population in the highlands of Nyanza Province, western Kenya, is subject to sporadic epidemics of Plasmodium falciparum. Indoor residual spraying (IRS) and long-lasting insecticide treated nets (LLINs) are used widely in this area. These interventions are most effective when Anopheles rest and feed indoors and when biting occurs at times when individuals use LLINs. It is therefore important to test the current assumption of vector feeding preferences, and late night feeding times, in order to estimate the extent to which LLINs protect the inhabitants from vector bites. METHODS: Mosquito collections were made for six consecutive nights each month between June 2011 and May 2012. CDC light-traps were set next to occupied LLINs inside and outside randomly selected houses and emptied hourly. The net usage of residents, their hours of house entry and exit and times of sleeping were recorded and the individual hourly exposure to vectors indoors and outdoors was calculated. Using these data, the true protective efficacy of nets (P*), for this population was estimated, and compared between genders, age groups and from month to month. RESULTS: Primary vector species (Anopheles funestus s.l. and Anopheles arabiensis) were more likely to feed indoors but the secondary vector Anopheles coustani demonstrated exophagic behaviour (p < 0.05). A rise in vector biting activity was recorded at 19:30 outdoors and 18:30 indoors. Individuals using LLINs experienced a moderate reduction in their overall exposure to malaria vectors from 1.3 to 0.47 bites per night. The P* for the population over the study period was calculated as 51% and varied significantly with age and season (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, LLINs offered the local population partial protection against malaria vector bites. It is likely that P* would be estimated to be greater if the overall suppression of the local vector population due to widespread community net use could be taken into account. However, the overlap of early biting habit of vectors and human activity in this region indicates that additional methods of vector control are required to limit transmission. Regular surveillance of both vector behaviour and domestic human-behaviour patterns would assist the planning of future control interventions in this region

Molecular Characterization Reveals Diverse and Unknown Malaria Vectors in the Western Kenyan Highlands.

The success of mosquito-based malaria control is dependent upon susceptible bionomic traits in local malaria vectors. It is crucial to have accurate and reliable methods to determine mosquito species composition in areas subject to malaria. An unexpectedly diverse set of Anopheles species was collected in the western Kenyan highlands, including unidentified and potentially new species carrying the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum. This study identified 2,340 anopheline specimens using both ribosomal DNA internal transcribed spacer region 2 and mitochondrial DNA cytochrome oxidase subunit 1 loci. Seventeen distinct sequence groups were identified. Of these, only eight could be molecularly identified through comparison to published and voucher sequences. Of the unidentified species, four were found to carry P. falciparum by circumsporozoite enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and polymerase chain reaction, the most abundant of which had infection rates comparable to a primary vector in the area, Anopheles funestus. High-quality adult specimens of these unidentified species could not be matched to museum voucher specimens or conclusively identified using multiple keys, suggesting that they may have not been previously described. These unidentified vectors were captured outdoors. Diverse and unknown species have been incriminated in malaria transmission in the western Kenya highlands using molecular identification of unusual morphological variants of field specimens. This study demonstrates the value of using molecular methods to compliment vector identifications and highlights the need for accurate characterization of mosquito species and their associated behaviors for effective malaria control

A multi-centre cohort study on healthcare use due to medication-related harm: the role of frailty and polypharmacy

Objectives To determine the association between frailty and medication-related harm requiring healthcare utilisation. Design Prospective observational cohort study. Setting Six primary and five secondary care sites across South East England, September 2013–November 2015. Participants One thousand and two hundred and eighty participants, ≥65 years old, who were due for discharge from general medicine and older persons’ wards following an acute episode of care. Exclusion criteria were limited life expectancy, transfer to another hospital and consent not gained. Main outcome measures Medication-related harm requiring healthcare utilisation (including primary, secondary or tertiary care consultations related to MRH), including adverse drug reactions, non-adherence and medication error determined via the review of data from three sources: patient/carer reports gathered through a structured telephone interview; primary care medical record review; and prospective consultant-led review of readmission to recruiting hospital. Frailty was measured using a Frailty Index, developed using a standardised approach. Marginal estimates were obtained from logistic regression models to examine how probabilities of healthcare service use due to medication-related harm were associated with increasing number of medicines and frailty. Results Healthcare utilisation due to medication-related harm was significantly associated with frailty (OR = 10.06, 95% CI 2.06–49.26, P = 0.004), independent of age, gender, and number of medicines. With increasing frailty, the need for healthcare use as a result of MRH increases from a probability of around 0.2–0.4. This is also the case for the number of medicines. Conclusions Frailty is associated with MRH, independent of polypharmacy. Reducing the burden of frailty through an integrated health and social care approach, alongside strategies to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy, may reduce MRH related healthcare utilisation

The challenges of communicating research evidence in practice: perspectives from UK health visitors and practice nurses

&lt;p&gt;Background: Health practitioners play a pivotal role in providing patients with up-to-date evidence and health information. Evidence-based practice and patient-centred care are transforming the delivery of healthcare in the UK. Health practitioners are increasingly balancing the need to provide evidence-based information against that of facilitating patient choice, which may not always concur with the evidence base. There is limited research exploring how health practitioners working in the UK, and particularly those more autonomous practitioners such as health visitors and practice nurses working in community practice settings, negotiate this challenge. This research provides a descriptive account of how health visitors and practice nurses negotiate the challenges of communicating health information and research evidence in practice.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Methods: A total of eighteen in-depth telephone interviews were conducted in the UK between September 2008 and May 2009. The participants comprised nine health visitors and nine practice nurses, recruited via adverts on a nursing website, posters at a practitioner conference and through recommendation. Thematic analysis, with a focus on constant comparative method, was used to analyse the data.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Results: The data were grouped into three main themes: communicating evidence to the critically-minded patient; confidence in communicating evidence; and maintaining the integrity of the patient-practitioner relationship. These findings highlight some of the daily challenges that health visitors and practice nurses face with regard to the complex and dynamic nature of evidence and the changing attitudes and expectations of patients. The findings also highlight the tensions that exist between differing philosophies of evidence-based practice and patient-centred care, which can make communicating about evidence a daunting task.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Conclusions: If health practitioners are to be effective at communicating research evidence, we suggest that more research and resources need to be focused on contextual factors, such as how research evidence is negotiated, appraised and communicated within the dynamic patient-practitioner relationship.&lt;/p&gt