Search

Background: Improving use of anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients in primary care has proved challenging. Anticoagulants are often prescribed by primary care physicians in the long term. Suboptimal anticoagulant use may be partly due to physicians' non-prescribing. One potential way of targeting physician prescribing behavior is “audit & feedback”. The documented use of audit and feedback in research aimed at increasing use of anticoagulants in primary care is limited. The objective was to test if an audit & feedback intervention aimed at directors in primary care centers could increase the use of anticoagulants in patients with AF. Methods: Database generated quality reports with primary care center specific data on recommended medication use in their patients with previous stroke or atrial fibrillation were sent to intervention centers. Results: 94 centers received the intervention, 102 centers were controls. 31,477 patients in total were included. Use of anticoagulants in all primary care centers increased from 76% before to 82% after the intervention. Patients in intervention centers were more likely than patients in control centers to use anticoagulants after the intervention, adjusted odds ratio increasing slightly from 1.04 (95%, CI, 0.98–1.10) before to 1.08 (95% CI, 1.02–1.15) after the intervention. Conclusions: An audit & feedback intervention with quality reports in primary care had only a small effect on anticoagulant use in patients with AF. A combined and more complex intervention may have a greater effect in improving anticoagulation use., Funding Agencies:Stockholm Drug and Therapeutics CommitteeBLIWAStrokeRiksförbundetCapio Research Foundation

Objective: The aim with this study was to understand more about how general practitioners (GPs) and nurses in primary care experience their work with medication reviews in elderly patients. Design: This qualitative study was nested within a cluster randomised trial and analysed narrative and unstructured diaries written by two pharmacists who performed academic detailing, i.e. educational outreach visits in primary care. The educational sessions dealt with potentially inappropriate medicines, and stimulated interprofessional dialogue in relation to medication reviews. The purpose of the diaries was to document and structure the pedagogical process of academic detailing and contained quotes from 194 GP and 113 nurse participants in the sessions, and the pharmacists’ reflections. The data was explored using thematic analysis. Setting: Thirty-three primary care practices in Stockholm, Sweden. Subjects: GPs and nurses working in primary care. Main outcome measures: Thematic descriptions of academic detailing by pharmacists. Results: Five themes were identified: 1) Complexity in 3 ‘P’: patients, pharmacotherapy, and primary care; 2) What, when, who? Clash between GPs’ and nurses’ experiences and guidelines; 3) Real-world problems and less-than-ideal solutions; 4) Eureka? Experiences with different steps during a medication review; and 5) Threats to GP autonomy. Conclusion: GPs and nurses should participate in the construction and release of guidelines in order to increase their usability in clinical practice. Future research should analyse if alternative strategies such as condensed medical reviews and feedback on prescribing are easier to implement in primary care.Key points Complex medication reviews have been introduced on a large scale in Swedish primary care, but knowledge on GPs’ and nurses’ views on such reviews is lacking. In the context of primary care alternative strategies such as condensed medication reviews and feedback on prescribing may be more applicab

PURPOSE: Potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) may cause 10% of unplanned admissions in elderly people. We performed an educational intervention in primary care to reduce acute health care consumption and PIMs through the promotion of medication reviews (MRs) in elderly patients.METHODS: This cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted in the context of an official campaign promoting rational drug use in elderly people. Sixty-nine primary health care practices with 119,910 patients aged older than or equal to 65 were randomized, with 1 dropout in the intervention group. The intervention consisted of educational outreach visits with feedback on prescribing and the development of a working procedure on MRs. Follow-up was 9 months. Outcomes were assessed in an administrative health care database. The combined primary outcome was unplanned hospital admission and/or emergency department visit. Secondary outcomes were among other PIMs and rates of MRs. The risk differences in outcomes between intervention and control group were estimated by using regression models.RESULTS: During follow-up, 22.8% of patients in the intervention and 22.0% in the control group were admitted unplanned to hospital and/or experienced at least 1 emergency department (nonsignificant risk difference 0.8%, 95% CI -0.7% to 2.4%). There were no significant differences regarding secondary outcomes such as PIMs or MRs.CONCLUSIONS: No changes were seen in acute health care consumption, PIMs, and MRs in elderly patients after an educational intervention in primary care. The reasons for the lack of effect could be a suboptimal intervention, limitations in outcome measures, and the use of administrative data to monitor outcomes.

The efficacy of antihypertensive drug therapy is undisputed, but observational studies show that few patients reach a target blood pressure <140/90mmHg. However, there is limited data on the drug prescribing patterns and their effectiveness in real practice. This retrospective observational survey of electronic patient records extracted data from 24 Swedish primary health-care centres, with a combined registered population of 330 000 subjects. We included all patients >= 30 years with a recorded diagnosis of hypertension who consulted the centres in 2005 or 2006 (n = 21 167). Main outcome measures were systolic and diastolic blood pressures, and prescribed antihypertensive drug classes. Only 27% had a blood pressure <140/90mmHg. The number of prescribed drugs increased with age, except among the oldest (>= 90 years). Only 29% of patients given monotherapy had a blood pressure <140/90mmHg. Women more often received diuretics (52 vs 42%), and less often angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (22 vs 33%) and calcium channel blockers (26 vs 31%) than men. beta-Blockers and diuretics were the most common drug classes prescribed, independent of comorbidity. In conclusion, one out of four primary care patients with hypertension reach target blood pressure. More frequent use of drug combinations may improve blood pressure control. Journal of Human Hypertension (2011) 25, 484-491; doi: 10.1038/jhh.2010.86; published online 19 August 2010