Search

Objectives: Dementia guidelines recommend antipsychotics are only used for behavioral and psychological symptoms when non‐drug interventions fail, and to regularly review use. Population‐level clinical quality indicators (CQIs) for dementia care in permanent residential aged care (PRAC) typically monitor prevalence of antipsychotic use but not prolonged use. This study aimed to develop a CQI for antipsychotic use >90 days and examine trends, associated factors, and variation in CQI incidence; and examine duration of the first episode of use among individuals with dementia accessing home care packages (HCPs) or PRAC. Methods: Retrospective cohort study, including older individuals with dementia who accessed HCPs (n = 50,257) or PRAC (n = 250,196). Trends in annual CQI incidence (2011–12 to 2015–16) and associated factors were determined using Poisson regression. Funnel plots examined geographical and facility variation. Time to antipsychotic discontinuation was estimated among new antipsychotic users accessing HCP (n = 2367) and PRAC (n = 15,597) using the cumulative incidence function. Results: Between 2011–12 and 2015–16, antipsychotic use for >90 days decreased in HCP recipients from 10.7% (95% CI 10.2–11.1) to 10.1% (95% CI 9.6–10.5, adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) 0.97 (95% CI 0.95–0.98)), and in PRAC residents from 24.5% (95% CI 24.2–24.7) to 21.8% (95% CI 21.5–22.0, aIRR 0.97 (95% CI 0.96–0.98)). Prior antipsychotic use (both cohorts) and being male and greater socioeconomic disadvantage (PRAC cohort) were associated with higher CQI incidence. Little geographical/facility variation was observed. Median treatment duration in HCP and PRAC was 334 (interquartile range [IQR] 108–958) and 555 (IQR 197–1239) days, respectively. Conclusions: While small decreases in antipsychotic use >90 days were observed between 2011–12 and 2015–16, findings suggest antipsychotic use among aged care recipients with dementia can be further minimized. Key points: We developed a quality indicator for monitoring prolonged antipsychotic use (>90 days) and examined trends, associated factors and facility and geographical variation among aged care recipients with dementia.We also examined time to antipsychotic discontinuation among new antipsychotic users who had diagnosed dementia.Trends in antipsychotic use for >90 days decreased among individuals receiving home care packages (HCPs) and residents of permanent residential aged care (PRAC) facilities during 2011–12 and 2015–16.The median duration of treatment among individuals commencing an antipsychotic was 0.9 and 1.5 years among older people accessing HCPs and PRAC, respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which examined diabetes prevalence in Australian long-term care (LTC) facilities using a linked national health and aged care data platform and the level of agreement of prevalence estimates between datasets that capture diabetes cases. Topics include diabetes case ascertainment using linked aged care and health administrative data sets, prevalence of diabetes in National Death Index (NDI) data, and the high burden of diabetes in Australian LTC facilities.

Background: Allergy to opioids is the second most common drug allergy label in electronic health records (EHR). Adverse drug reactions (ADR) to opioids cause significant morbidity and contribute to healthcare costs, while incorrect opioid allergy labels may unnecessarily complicate patient management. Aims: To examine the documentation of opioid ADR in a large‐scale hospital‐based EHR. Methods: A cross‐sectional retrospective review of EHR documentation of opioid ADR at four public hospitals in South Australia was conducted. Data were extracted from all ADR entries including the reported allergen, ADR category (allergy or intolerance) and reaction details. Expert criteria were used to determine consistency of ADR categorisation as allergy or intolerance. Results: Of 86 727 unique ADR reports, there were 13 781 ADR to opioids with most being entered as allergy (n = 8913, 64.7%) rather than intolerance (n = 4868, 35.3%). The most commonly documented reactions were nausea/vomiting (n = 3912, 28%), rash (n = 647, 5%), itch (n = 642, 5%) and hallucinations (n = 527, 4%). There were 362 (3%) ADR labels of anaphylaxis. Of those ADR containing a reaction description (n = 11 868), 89% of reports entered as allergy had a reaction description that was consistent with intolerance and 8% of the entered intolerances had descriptions consistent with allergy when assessed using predefined criteria. Conclusions: This large EHR‐based study demonstrates the high rate of opioid ADR labels in EHR. The majority of these labels were for symptoms suggestive of pharmacological intolerance. Reactions consistent with true allergy were uncommon. Systematic review of ADR by a dedicated clinical service would improve the accuracy of documentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Co‐prescribing of opioids and sedatives is a known risk factor for opioid‐induced ventilatory impairment (OIVI). Prevalence data for sedative and opioid co‐prescription in inpatients in Australia are unknown. Our objective was to determine the prevalence of inpatient sedative and opioid co‐prescribing and to identify factors associated with co‐prescription. We conducted a retrospective cross‐sectional study from July 2017 to October 2017 across four South Australian hospitals utilizing a centralized electronic health record. Multivariate analysis was used to identify characteristics predictive of co‐prescribing of a strong opioid (fentanyl, hydromorphone, morphine, and oxycodone) and sedative medications (benzodiazepines, antiepileptics, antipsychotics, and tricyclic antidepressants). Of the 6170 inpatients, 2795 (45.3%) were prescribed a strong opioid and of those, 1889 (30.6% of all inpatients) were co‐prescribed a sedative. Of those prescribed a strong opioid, five (0.18%) developed OIVI. Patients prescribed a strong opioid had a 27–77% increased likelihood of being prescribed a sedative. Factors predictive of sedative co‐prescribing included the presence of disease of the central nervous system adjusted OR (aOR) 8.66 [95% CI 5.83–12.9] and respiratory disease aOR 1.42 [95% CI 1.17–1.72]. Nearly, one third of all hospital inpatients were co‐prescribed a strong opioid and a sedative medication. Patients with comorbidities resulting in increased risk of respiratory depression/OIVI were more likely to have sedative co‐prescription. Clinicians should be aware of the effects of high‐risk medications and ensure that systems and monitoring are in place that help mitigate adverse outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Australia, 243 000 individuals live in approximately 2700 residential aged care facilities yearly. In 2019, a National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator programme (QI programme) was implemented to monitor the quality and safety of care in facilities. Aim: To examine the validity of the QI programme indicators using explicit measure review criteria. Methods: The QI programme manual and reports were reviewed. A modified American College of Physicians Measure Review Criteria was employed to examine the QI programme's eight indicators. Five authors rated each indicator on importance, appropriateness, clinical evidence, specifications and feasibility using a nine‐point scale. A median score of 1–3 was considered to not meet criteria, 4–6 to meet some criteria and 7–9 to meet criteria. Results: All indicators, except polypharmacy, met criteria (median scores = 7–9) for importance, appropriateness and clinical evidence. Polypharmacy met some criteria for importance (median = 6, range 2–8), appropriateness (median = 5, range 2–8) and clinical evidence (median = 6, range 3–8). Pressure injury, physical restraints, significant unplanned weight loss, consecutive unplanned weight loss, falls and polypharmacy indicators met some criteria for specifications validity (all median scores = 5) and feasibility and applicability (median scores = 4 to 6). Antipsychotic use and falls resulting in major injury met some criteria for specifications (median = 6–7, range 4–8) and met criteria for feasibility and applicability (median = 7, range 4–8). Conclusions: Australia's National QI programme is a major stride towards a culture of quality promotion, improvement and transparency. Measures' specifications, feasibility and applicability could be improved to ensure the programme delivers on its intended purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The majority of patients with penicillin allergy labels tolerate penicillins. Inappropriate avoidance of penicillin is associated with increased hospitalisation, infections and healthcare costs. Aims To examine the documentation of penicillin adverse drug reactions ( ADR) in a large-scale hospital-based electronic health record. Methods Penicillin ADR were extracted from 96 708 patient records in the Enterprise Patient Administration System in South Australia. Expert criteria were used to determine consistency of ADR entry and suitability for further evaluation. Results Of 43 011 unique ADR reports, there were 5023 ADR to penicillins with most being entered as allergy ( n = 4773, 95.0%) rather than intolerance ( n = 250, 5.0%). A significant proportion did not include a reaction description ( n = 1052, 20.9%). Using pre-set criteria, 10.1% of reports entered as allergy had a reaction description that was consistent with intolerance and 31.0% of the entered intolerances had descriptions consistent with allergy. Virtually all ADR ( n = 4979, 99.1%) were appropriate for further evaluation by history taking or immunological testing and half (50.7%, n = 2549) had documented reactions suggesting low-risk of penicillin allergy. Conclusion The frequency of penicillin allergy label in this data set is consistent with the known overdiagnosis of penicillin allergy in the hospital population. ADR documentation was poor with incomplete entries and inconsistent categorisation. The concepts of allergy and intolerance for ADR classification, whilst mechanistically valid, may not be useful at the point of ADR entry by generalist clinicians. Systematic evaluation of reported ADR is needed to improve the quality of information for future prescribers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: A rare association of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use with the development of inflammatory myopathies (IM) has been reported, but, unlike with statin medications, there is limited data supporting or refuting this observation.Methods: A case-control study was conducted on patients with IM. Clinical information, medications, and demographics were recorded. Controls were matched 3:1 for age and gender.Results: Two hundred twenty-one cases of IM were identified. No association of PPI use with IM was observed when compared with controls (odds ratio 1.04 [95% confidence interval 0.68-1.58]) and similar results were observed after adjusting for diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and statin exposure (adjusted odds ratio 1.084 [95% confidence interval 0.69-1.70]). There was no association of any histologic subtype of IM with PPI exposure.Discussion: Our findings do not support an association of PPI exposure with IM. Co-prescription of PPI with other medications was not considered and could be further investigated with larger cohorts. Muscle Nerve 58:855-857, 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The correct classification of an adverse drug reaction (ADR) as allergy (immunological) or intolerance (non-immunological) has important clinical implications. The aim of this study was to examine the ability of health professionals to discriminate between allergy and intolerance, classify the severity of the ADR and degree of contraindication. Methods: Health professionals were presented ten 'real-life' ADR scenarios using an online questionnaire and asked to: categorise the reaction as allergy or intolerance, rate the severity of the reaction and judge the level of contraindication of the causative drug. The number and proportion of responses were calculated for each of the cases presented and associations between classification of reaction type, severity and level of contraindication were examined. Results: A total of 394 responses were received. Overall 59.0% (SD 28.9) correctly categorised the cases, 60.8% (SD 16.8) classified the severity correct, and less than half (44.7%, SD 28.6) correctly identified the level of contraindication. The proportion of health professionals correctly answering the type, severity and level of contraindication for the allergy case was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) by comparison to the intolerance cases (type: 56.6% ± 33.1; severity: 57.3 ± 11.9; level of contraindication: 38.5 ± 19.9). Conclusions: Health professionals have suboptimal understanding of classification of ADRs. Strategies are required to strictly avoid re-exposure of patients to drugs which carry an increased risk of inducing a dangerous reaction, whilst minimising the avoidance of drugs which are of minimal risk or allowing the use of low-risk drugs where the benefits may be significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of adverse drug reaction (ADR) documentation in a state‐wide electronic health record (EHR), and to assess the impact of the interface design on documentation accuracy and ability to provide decision support. Data were extracted from 43 011 unique records in a state‐wide electronic health record in South Australia, Australia. Information obtained included ADR coding as allergy or intolerance, allergen name, reaction, and occupation of those entering data. Categorization into drug allergy or intolerance was assessed for accuracy. Reactions were entered predominantly by nurses (60.1%), also by doctors (31.0%) and pharmacists (6.1%). Of 27 314 reactions, 86.5% were coded as allergy and 13.5% as intolerance. The majority (78.2%) described reactions to drugs (as opposed to food, environmental or contact allergens), predominantly chosen from the drug database (96.4%). Many entries used free text for the reaction description (27.4%). Terms found in the predefined list under the allergy heading were more likely to be categorized as allergy, even when the mechanism was pharmacological intolerance. Only 45.1% (n = 1671/3705) of reactions consistent with intolerance (eg, “nausea,” “diarrhea”) were correctly categorized as such, although categorization by pharmacists was more accurate (P < .0001). These data suggest that ADR categorization as allergy or intolerance is influenced by the EHR design. The obligatory classification of ADRs into allergy or intolerance was not well understood and does not appear to have practical benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medication errors are a leading cause of harm to patients in hospital that can be decreased by electronic medication management systems. Aims: This study determined the effects of electronic prescribing using the Enterprise Patient Administration System (EPAS) on prescribing errors and adverse drug reaction (ADR) documentation in South Australian public hospitals. Methods: A prospective structured medication chart audit was conducted before (in 2012) and after the implementation (in Dec 2014) of EPAS, comparing the paper‐based National Inpatient Medication Chart (NIMC) with prescribing. All inpatients were eligible for inclusion in the study. Prescribing order errors were determined by the percentage of medication orders that had unclear, illegal or unsafe prescriptions. The quality of ADR documentation was assessed by the percentage of patients with correct documentation. Results: The total number of prescribing errors before and after the implementation of EPAS was 67.7 and 2.8 per 100 orders, respectively. The frequency of prescribing order errors due to unclear, illegal and unsafe prescriptions decreased to almost zero with EPAS. Prescriptions classified as unsafe due to incorrect dose, route of administration or dosing frequency decreased from 5.8% to 0.03% of medication orders before versus after EPAS implementation (p < 0.0001). Completed ADR documentation was similar between the paper‐based NIMC and EPAS, but the percentage of patients with ADR alerts who required them was 100% in EPAS compared with 27% on the NIMC (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: E‐prescribing using EPAS significantly decreased prescribing errors and increased ADR alerts. Continued implementation of electronic medication management systems is an important approach to improve medication safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To examine individual, medication, system, and healthcare related predictors of hospitalization and emergency department (ED) presentation within 90 days of entering the aged care sector, and to create risk‐profiles associated with these outcomes. Design and setting: Retrospective population‐based cohort study using data from the Registry of Senior Australians. Participants: Older people (aged 65 and older) with an aged care eligibility assessment in South Australia between January 1, 2013 and May 31, 2016 (N = 22,130). Measurements Primary outcomes were unplanned hospitalization and ED presentation within 90 days of assessment. Individual, medication, system, and healthcare related predictors of the outcomes at the time of assessment, within 90 days or 1‐year prior. Fine–Gray models were used to calculate subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Harrell's C‐index assessed predictive ability. Results: Four thousand nine‐hundred and six (22.2%) individuals were hospitalized and 5028 (22.7%) had an ED presentation within 90 days. Predictors of hospitalization included: being a man (hospitalization sHR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.26–1.42), ≥3 urgent after‐hours attendances (hospitalization sHR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.06–1.39), increasing frailty index score (hospitalization sHR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.11–1.28), individuals using glucocorticoids (hospitalization sHR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.02–1.20), sulfonamides (hospitalization sHR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.10–1.27), trimethoprim antibiotics (hospitalization sHR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.03–1.29), unplanned hospitalizations 30 days prior (hospitalization sHR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.04–1.23), and ED presentations 1 year prior (hospitalization sHR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.04–1.10). Similar predictors and hazard estimates were also observed for ED presentations. The hospitalization models out‐of‐sample predictive ability (C‐index = 0.653, 95% CI 0.635–0.670) and ED presentations (C‐index = 0.647, 95% CI 0.630–0.663) were moderate. Conclusions: One in five individuals with aged care eligibility assessments had unplanned hospitalizations and/or ED presentation within 90 days with several predictors identified at the time of aged care eligibility assessment. This is an actionable period for targeting at‐risk individuals to reduce hospitalizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the literature, polypharmacy is commonly defined as using five or more medicines. Little is known about how physicians and pharmacists define and assess polypharmacy in practice. Aim: This study determined how expert physicians and pharmacists define and assess polypharmacy in practice. Methods: An online survey was sent to 25 expert physicians and pharmacists who were chosen if they had done significant work in the area of polypharmacy through major research, clinical practice or both, to identify how experts define and assess polypharmacy in practice. Results: Twenty‐two participants completed the survey (88% response rate). There was strong agreement between experts, including which factors are important when assessing polypharmacy (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.94). Respondents used the number of medicines (n = 18 respondents; 56.3% of all definitions), such as five or more medicines, and brief descriptions (n = 4 respondents; 43.7% of all definitions), such as assessing appropriateness given comorbidities, to define polypharmacy. Respondents commonly indicated patient factors such as functional status (n = 11 respondents; 50%) and medicine‐related factors such as drug–drug interactions (n = 11; 50%) as important when assessing polypharmacy. Experts reported low use of externally validated polypharmacy tools during polypharmacy assessment, with 36.4% (n = 8) being unfamiliar with or never or rarely using these tools. Conclusion: Medication‐ and patient‐related factors beyond a medicines count were deemed important in assessing polypharmacy. Given the low use of externally validated polypharmacy tools, strategies that include important medication‐ and patient‐related factors are required to facilitate polypharmacy rationalisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An abstract of the article "Drug Allergy Reports on Medicalalert ® Devices," by Caroline Foreman and colleagues is presented.