Effects of pharmacists’ interventions on appropriateness of prescribing for elderly and exploration of a possible correlation between scores for appropriateness and clinical outcomes: analyses from a randomized controlled trial
(English)Manuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
Inappropriate prescribing can cause substantial morbidity and represents a clinical and economic burden for patients and society. Appropriateness of prescribing can be assessed by various measures and screening tools, however, for a tool to be valid there should be casual links to important clinical health outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a pharmacist intervention on appropriateness of prescribing, and to explore the relationship between these results and clinical health outcomes defined as re-visits to hospital.
The study population from a previous randomized controlled study, in which the effects of a comprehensive pharmacist intervention on re-hospitalisation was investigated, was used. The criteria from the validated instruments STOPP, START and MAI were applied retrospectively to the study patients (368 patients; intervention group n=182, control group n=186). The quality assessments were done on admission and at discharge to detect differences over time between the control- and the intervention group. Hospital care consumption one year after admission was recorded and the correlation between scores for appropriateness, as well as number of drugs at discharge, and hospital visits was analysed.
The number of Potentially Inappropriate Medicines (PIMs) per patient as identified by STOPP was reduced for the intervention group but not for the control group (1.42 and 0.93 vs. 1.46 and 1.66 respectively, p<0.01) The number of Potential Prescription Omissions (PPOs) per patient as identified by START was reduced for the intervention group but not for the control group (0.36 and 0.09 vs. 0.42 and 0.45 respectively, p<0.001). The summated score for MAI was reduced for the intervention group but not for the control group (8.5 to 5.0 and 8.7 to 10.0 respectively, p< 0.001). There was no correlation between the scores of the tools and total visits to hospital. Number of drugs (unadjusted) correlated with visits to hospital and the rate ratio was 4%. For readmissions to hospital, MAI (unadjusted) and the number of drugs showed a positive correlation. There was a correlation between MAI and STOPP and drug-related readmissions (RR 8-9% and 30-34% respectively).
The addition of a comprehensive pharmacist service to standard care significantly improved the appropriateness of prescribing for patients in the intervention group that participated in the randomized controlled trial, as evaluated by all three instruments used; STOPP, START and MAI. However, the results on correlation between the tools and re-visits to hospital were inconclusive.
appropriateness, quality of prescribing, hospitalisation, pharmacist intervention
Social and Clinical Pharmacy
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-167138OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-167138DiVA: diva2:481726