The frequency of inappropriate nonformulary medication alert overrides in the inpatient setting

Background Experts suggest that formulary alerts at the time of medication order entry are the most effective form of clinical decision support to automate formulary management. Objective Our objectives were to quantify the frequency of inappropriate nonformulary medication (NFM) alert overrides in the inpatient setting and provide insight on how the design of formulary alerts could be improved. Methods Alert overrides of the top 11 (n = 206) most-utilized and highest-costing NFMs, from January 1 to December 31, 2012, were randomly selected for appropriateness evaluation. Using an empirically developed appropriateness algorithm, appropriateness of NFM alert overrides was assessed by 2 pharmacists via chart review. Appropriateness agreement of overrides was assessed with a Cohen’s kappa. We also assessed which types of NFMs were most likely to be inappropriately overridden, the override reasons that were disproportionately provided in the inappropriate overrides, and the specific reasons the overrides were considered inappropriate. Results Approximately 17.2% (n = 35.4/206) of NFM alerts were inappropriately overridden. Non-oral NFM alerts were more likely to be inappropriately overridden compared to orals. Alerts overridden with “blank” reasons were more likely to be inappropriate. The failure to first try a formulary alternative was the most common reason for alerts being overridden inappropriately. Conclusion Approximately 1 in 5 NFM alert overrides are overridden inappropriately. Future research should evaluate the impact of mandating a valid override reason and adding a list of formulary alternatives to each NFM alert; we speculate these NFM alert features may decrease the frequency of inappropriate overrides

Comparison of 6 Mortality Risk Scores for Prediction of 1-Year Mortality Risk in Older Adults with Multimorbidity

Importance: The most appropriate therapy for older adults with multimorbidity may depend on life expectancy (ie, mortality risk), and several scores have been developed to predict 1-year mortality risk. However, often, these mortality risk scores have not been externally validated in large sample sizes, and a head-to-head comparison in a prospective contemporary cohort is lacking. Objective: To prospectively compare the performance of 6 scores in predicting the 1-year mortality risk in hospitalized older adults with multimorbidity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study analyzed data of participants in the OPERAM (Optimising Therapy to Prevent Avoidable Hospital Admissions in Multimorbid Older People) trial, which was conducted between December 1, 2016, and October 31, 2018, in surgical and nonsurgical departments of 4 university-based hospitals in Louvain, Belgium; Utrecht, the Netherlands; Cork, Republic of Ireland; and Bern, Switzerland. Eligible participants in the OPERAM trial had multimorbidity (≥3 coexisting chronic diseases), were aged 70 years or older, had polypharmacy (≥5 long-term medications), and were admitted to a participating ward. Data were analyzed from April 1 to September 30, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome of interest was any-cause death occurring in the first year of inclusion in the OPERAM trial. Overall performance, discrimination, and calibration of the following 6 scores were assessed: Burden of Illness Score for Elderly Persons, CARING (Cancer, Admissions ≥2, Residence in a nursing home, Intensive care unit admit with multiorgan failure, ≥2 Noncancer hospice guidelines) Criteria, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Gagné Index, Levine Index, and Walter Index. These scores were assessed using the following measures: Brier score (0 indicates perfect overall performance and 0.25 indicates a noninformative model); C-statistic and 95% CI; Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test and calibration plots; and sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Results: The 1879 patients in the study had a median (IQR) age of 79 (74-84) years and 835 were women (44.4%). The median (IQR) number of chronic diseases was 11 (8-16). Within 1 year, 375 participants (20.0%) died. Brier scores ranged from 0.16 (Gagné Index) to 0.24 (Burden of Illness Score for Elderly Persons). C-statistic values ranged from 0.62 (95% CI, 0.59-0.65) for Charlson Comorbidity Index to 0.69 (95% CI, 0.66-0.72) for the Walter Index. Calibration was good for the Gagné Index and moderate for other mortality risk scores. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this prognostic study suggest that all 6 of the 1-year mortality risk scores examined had moderate prognostic performance, discriminatory power, and calibration in a large cohort of hospitalized older adults with multimorbidity. Overall, none of these mortality risk scores outperformed the others, and thus none could be recommended for use in daily clinical practice.

Measurement properties of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in recording self-reported health status in older patients with substantial multimorbidity and polypharmacy

Background The EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L are two generic health-related quality of life measures, which may be used in clinical and health economic research. They measure impairment in 5 aspects of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in measuring the self-reported health status of older patients with substantial multimorbidity and associated polypharmacy. Methods Between 2017 and 2019, we administered EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L to a subset of patients participating in the OPERAM trial at 6 months and 12 months after enrolment. The OPERAM trial is a two-arm multinational cluster randomised controlled trial of structured medication review assisted by a software-based decision support system versus usual pharmaceutical care, for older people (aged ≥ 70 years) with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. In the psychometric analyses, we only included participants who completed the measures in full at 6 and 12 months. We assessed whether responses to the measures were consistent by assessing the proportion of EQ-5D-5L responses, which were 2 or more levels away from that person’s EQ-5D-3L response. We also compared the measures in terms of informativity, and discriminant validity and responsiveness relative to the Barthel Index, which measures independence in activities of daily living. Results 224 patients (mean age of 77 years; 56% male) were included in the psychometric analyses. Ceiling effects reported with the EQ-5D-5L (22%) were lower than with the EQ-5D-3L (29%). For the mobility item, the EQ-5D-5L demonstrated better informativity (Shannon’s evenness index score of 0.86) than the EQ-5D-3L (Shannon’s evenness index score of 0.69). Both the 3L and 5L versions of EQ-5D demonstrated good performance in terms of discriminant validity, i.e. (out of all items of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L, the pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression items had the weakest correlation with the Barthel Index. Both the 3L and 5L versions of EQ-5D demonstrated good responsiveness to changes in the Barthel Index. Conclusion Both EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L demonstrated validity and responsiveness when administered to older adults with substantial multimorbidity and polypharmacy who were able to complete the measures

Frequency and acceptance of clinical decision support system-generated STOPP/START signals for hospitalised older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity

Background The Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) instrument is used to evaluate the appropriateness of medication in older people. STOPP/START criteria have been converted into software algorithms and implemented in a clinical decision support system (CDSS) to facilitate their use in clinical practice. Objective Our objective was to determine the frequency of CDSS-generated STOPP/START signals and their subsequent acceptance by a pharmacotherapy team in a hospital setting. Design and Methods Hospitalised older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity allocated to the intervention arm of the OPERAM (OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in the Multimorbid elderly) trial underwent a CDSS-assisted structured medication review in four European hospitals. We evaluated the frequency of CDSS-generated STOPP/START signals and the subsequent acceptance of these signals by a trained pharmacotherapy team consisting of a physician and pharmacist after evaluation of clinical applicability to the individual patient, prior to discussing pharmacotherapy optimisation recommendations with the patient and attending physicians. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used to investigate potential patient-related (e.g. age, number of co-morbidities and medications) and setting-related (e.g. ward type, country of inclusion) determinants for acceptance of STOPP and START signals. Results In 819/826 (99%) of the patients, at least one STOPP/START signal was generated using a set of 110 algorithms based on STOPP/START v2 criteria. Overall, 39% of the 5080 signals were accepted by the pharmacotherapy team. There was a high variability in the frequency and the subsequent acceptance of the individual STOPP/START criteria. The acceptance ranged from 2.5 to 75.8% for the top ten most frequently generated STOPP and START signals. The signal to stop a drug without a clinical indication was most frequently generated (28%), with more than half of the signals accepted (54%). No difference in mean acceptance of STOPP versus START signals was found. In multivariate analysis, most patient-related determinants did not predict acceptance, although the acceptance of START signals increased in patients with one or more hospital admissions (+ 7.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-14.1) or one or more falls in the previous year (+ 7.1; 95% CI 0.7-13.4). A higher number of co-morbidities was associated with lower acceptance of STOPP (- 11.8%; 95% CI - 19.2 to - 4.5) and START (- 11.0%; 95% CI - 19.4 to - 2.6) signals for patients with more than nine and between seven and nine co-morbidities, respectively. For setting-related determinants, the acceptance differed significantly between the participating trial sites. Compared with Switzerland, the acceptance was higher in Ireland (STOPP: + 26.8%; 95% CI 16.8-36.7; START: + 31.1%; 95% CI 18.2-44.0) and in the Netherlands (STOPP: + 14.7%; 95% CI 7.8-21.7). Admission to a surgical ward was positively associated with acceptance of STOPP signals (+ 10.3%; 95% CI 3.8-16.8). Conclusion The involvement of an expert team in translating population-based CDSS signals to individual patients is essential, as more than half of the signals for potential overuse, underuse, and misuse were not deemed clinically appropriate in a hospital setting. Patient-related potential determinants were poor predictors of acceptance.Future research investigating factors that affect patients' and physicians' agreement with medication changes recommended by expert teams may provide further insight for implementation in clinical practice. Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02986425.Geriatrics in primary carePublic Health and primary car

Hospital physicians' and older patients' agreement with individualised STOPP/START-based medication optimisation recommendations in a clinical trial setting

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the agreement of hospital physicians and older patients with individualised STOPP/START-based medication optimisation recommendations from a pharmacotherapy team. METHODS: This study was embedded within a large European, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial examining the effect of a structured medication review on drug-related hospital admissions in multimorbid (≥ 3 chronic conditions) older people (≥ 70 years) with polypharmacy (≥ 5 chronic medications), called OPERAM. Data from the Dutch intervention arm of this trial were used for this study. Medication review was performed jointly by a physician and pharmacist (i.e. pharmacotherapy team) supported by a Clinical Decision Support System with integrated STOPP/START criteria. Individualised STOPP/START-based medication optimisation recommendations were discussed with patients and attending hospital physicians. RESULTS: 139 patients were included, mean (SD) age 78.3 (5.1) years, 47% male and median (IQR) number of medications at admission 11 (9-14). In total, 371 recommendations were discussed with patients and physicians, overall agreement was 61.6% for STOPP and 60.7% for START recommendations. Highest agreement was found for initiation of osteoporosis agents and discontinuation of proton pump inhibitors (both 74%). Factors associated with higher agreement in multivariate analysis were: female gender (+ 17.1% [3.7; 30.4]), ≥ 1 falls in the past year (+ 15.0% [1.5; 28.5]) and renal impairment i.e. eGFR 30-50 ml/min/1.73 m2; (+ 18.0% [2.0; 34.0]). The main reason for disagreement (40%) was patients' reluctance to discontinue or initiate medication. CONCLUSION: Better patient and physician education regarding the benefit/risk balance of pharmacotherapy, in addition to more precise and up-to-date medical records to avoid irrelevant recommendations, will likely result in higher adherence with future pharmacotherapy optimisation recommendations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial Registration Number NCT02986425

Optimizing therapy to prevent avoidable hospital admissions in multimorbid older adults (OPERAM): cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVETo examine the effect of optimising drug treatment on drug related hospital admissions in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy admitted to hospital.DESIGNCluster randomised controlled trial.SETTING110 clusters of inpatient wards within university based hospitals in four European countries (Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, and Republic of Ireland) defined by attending hospital doctors.PARTICIPANTS2008 older adults (>= 70 years) with multimorbidity (>= 3chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (>= 5 drugs used long term).INTERVENTIONClinical staff clusters were randomised to usual care or a structured pharmacotherapy optimisation intervention performed at the individual level jointly by a doctor and a pharmacist, with the support of a clinical decision software system deploying the screening tool of older person's prescriptions and screening tool to alert to the right treatment (STOPP/START) criteria to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing.MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREPrimary outcome was first drug related hospital admission within 12 months.RESULTS2008 older adults (median nine drugs) were randomised and enrolled in 54 intervention clusters (963 participants) and 56 control clusters (1045 participants) receiving usual care. In the intervention arm, 86.1% of participants (n=789) had inappropriate prescribing, with a mean of 2.75 (SD 2.24) STOPP/START recommendations for each participant. 62.2% (n=491) had >= 1 recommendation successfully implemented at two months, predominantly discontinuation of potentially inappropriate drugs. In the intervention group, 211 participants (21.9%) experienced a first drug related hospital admission compared with 234 (22.4%) in the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis censored for death as competing event (n=375, 18.7%), the hazard ratio for first drug related hospital admission was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.17). In the per protocol analysis, the hazard ratio for a drug related hospital admission was 0.91 (0.69 to 1.19). The hazard ratio for first fall was 0.96 (0.79 to 1.15; 237 v263 first falls) and for death was 0.90 (0.71 to 1.13; 172 v 203 deaths).CONCLUSIONSInappropriate prescribing was common in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy admitted to hospital and was reduced through an intervention to optimise pharmacotherapy, but without effect on drug related hospital admissions. Additional efforts are needed to identify pharmacotherapy optimisation interventions that reduce inappropriate prescribing and improve patient outcomes.Algorithms and the Foundations of Software technolog

[Prescribing inappropriate medication: the new STOPP/START criteria].

Prescribing inappropriate medication (PIM) is a common public health problem. Mainly due to associated adverse drugs events (ADE), it results in major morbidity and mortality, as well as increased healthcare utilization. For a long time, the systematic review of medications prescribed appeared as a solution for limiting PIM and the ADE associated with such prescriptions. With this aim and since 2008, the list of STOPP-START criteria has appeared as attractive in its design, as well as logical and easy to use. The initial version has just been updated and improved. After having detailed all improvements provided to the 2008 version, we present the result of its adaptation into French language by a group of French-speaking expert from Belgium, Canada, France, and Switzerland