Dataset Information

Addressing the polypharmacy challenge in older people with multimorbidity (APOLLO-MM): study protocol for an in-depth ethnographic case study in primary care.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Polypharmacy is on the rise. It is burdensome for patients and is a common source of error and adverse drug reactions, especially among older adults. Health policy advises clinicians to practice medicines optimisation-a person-centred approach to safe, effective medicines use. There has been little research exploring older patients' perspectives and priorities around medicines-taking or their actual practices of fitting medicines into their daily lives and how these are shaped by the wider context of healthcare.

Methods and analysis

We will conduct an in-depth multisite ethnographic case study. The study is based in seven clinical sites (three general practices and four community pharmacies) and includes longitudinal ethnographic follow-up of older adults, organisational ethnography and participatory methods. Main data sources include field notes of observations in the home and clinical settings; interviews with patients and professionals; cultural probe activities; video recordings of clinical consultations and interprofessional talk; documents. Our analysis will illuminate the everyday practices of polypharmacy from a range of lay and professional perspectives; the institutional contexts within which these practices play out and the sense-making work that sustains-or challenges-these practices. Our research will adopt a 'practice theory' lens, drawing on the sociology of organisational routines and other relevant social theory guided by ongoing iterative data analysis.

Ethics approval

The study has HRA approval and received a favourable ethical opinion from the Leeds West Research Ethics Committee (IRAS project ID: 205517; REC reference 16/YH/0462).

Dissemination

Aside from academic outputs, our findings will inform the development of recommendations for practice and policy including an interactive e-learning resource. We will also work with service users to co-design patient/public engagement resources.

SUBMITTER: Swinglehurst D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6707689 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Addressing the polypharmacy challenge in older people with multimorbidity (APOLLO-MM): study protocol for an in-depth ethnographic case study in primary care.

Swinglehurst Deborah D Fudge Nina N

BMJ open 20190822 8

<h4>Introduction</h4>Polypharmacy is on the rise. It is burdensome for patients and is a common source of error and adverse drug reactions, especially among older adults. Health policy advises clinicians to practice <i>medicines optimisation</i>-a person-centred approach to safe, effective medicines use. There has been little research exploring older patients' perspectives and priorities around medicines-taking or their actual practices of fitting medicines into their daily lives and how these a ...[more]

PMID: 31444195

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesWe explore how older patients affected by polypharmacy manage the 'hidden work' of organising their medicines, how they make sense of this work and integrate it into their lives.Design and settingEthnographic study observing patients over 18-24 months in patients' homes, general practice and community pharmacy, in England, UK.Participants and methodsEthnographic case study including longitudinal follow-up of 24 patients aged 65 or older and prescribed ten or more items of medication. Our dataset includes: 562 hours of ethnographic observation across patients homes, community pharmacies and general practices; 47 audio-recorded interviews with patients about their lives and medicines practices; cultural probes (photographs, body maps, diaries and imagined 'wishful thinking' conversations); fieldnotes from regular home visits; telephone calls, and observation/video-recording of healthcare encounters. We apply a 'practice theory' lens to our analysis, illuminating what is being accomplished, why and by whom.ResultsAll patients had developed strategies and routines for organising medicines into their lives, negotiating medicine taking to enable acceptable adherence and make their medicines manageable. Strategies adopted by patients often involved the use of 'do-it-yourself' dosette boxes. This required careful 'organising' work similar to that done by pharmacy staff preparing multicompartment compliance aids (MCCAs). Patients incorporated a range of approaches to manage supplies and flex their regimens to align with personal values and priorities. Practices of organising medicines are effortful, creative and often highly collaborative. Patients strive for adherence, but their organisational efforts privilege 'living with medicines' over taking medicines strictly 'as prescribed'.ConclusionsPolypharmacy demands careful organising. The burden of organising polypharmacy always falls somewhere, whether undertaken by pharmacists as they prepare MCCAs or by patients at home. Greater appreciation among prescribers of the nature and complexity of this work may provide a useful point of departure for tackling the key issue that sustains it: polypharmacy.

Project description:BackgroundThe implementation of individual clinical practice guidelines in patients with multimorbidity often results in polypharmacy. Our aim was to analyse medication use according to longitudinal multimorbidity patterns (MP) and determine during a 5-year period (2012-16) which MP are associated with abnormal liver and kidney function in primary care patients over 65 years of age living in Catalonia.MethodsDesign: Longitudinal study (years 2012 to 2016) based on the electronic health records contained in Information System for Research in Primary Care database of the Catalan Institute of Health (SIDIAP).Variablesage, sex, MP, medication and polypharmacy (drug exposure obtained from the Pharmacy Invoice Registry). Medicines were classified in accordance with the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System (ATC). Glomerular filtration rate was used to determine abnormal kidney function, and serum levels of alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase were used to diagnose abnormal liver function.StatisticsFor medication use in MP, we calculated annual mean packages of each drug in each MP, and observed/expected ratios were obtained by dividing mean packages in the cluster by mean packages of the same drug in the overall population. Logistic regression models were fitted to estimate the association between MP at baseline and abnormal kidney and liver function tests during follow up.ResultsNine hundred sixteen thousand six hundred nineteen patients were included, and 743,827 completed the follow up. We identified one polypharmacy profile per MP, and concluded that the most prescribed drugs in each pattern corresponded to the diseases overrepresented in that specific MP. The median of drugs ranged from 3 (Cluster 1 - Non-Specific) to 8 (Cluster 10 - Multisystem Pattern). Abnormal kidney function was most commonly observed in the Cluster 4 - Cardio-Circulatory and Renal (Odds Ratio [OR] 2.19; Confidence interval [CI] 95% 2.15-2.23) and Cluster 3 - Minority Metabolic Autoimmune-Inflammatory (OR 2.16; CI 95% 2.12-2.20) MP. A higher risk of abnormal liver function was observed in the Cluster 8 - Digestive (OR 3.39; CI 95% 3.30-3.49), and Cluster 4 - Cardio-Circulatory and Renal (OR 1.96; CI 95% 1.91-2.02) MP.ConclusionsA higher risk of abnormal kidney and liver function was observed in specific MP. The long-term characterisation of MP and polypharmacy illustrates the burden of chronic multimorbidity and polypharmacy in the elderly population.

Project description:ImportancePolypharmacy is associated with mortality, falls, hospitalizations, and functional and cognitive decline. The study of polypharmacy-related interventions has increased substantially, prompting the need for an updated, more focused systematic overview.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate and summarize evidence across multiple systematic reviews (SRs) examining interventions addressing polypharmacy.Evidence reviewA search was conducted of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects for articles published from January 2017-October 2022, as well as those identified in a previous overview (January 2004-February 2017). Systematic reviews were included regardless of study design, setting, or outcome. The evidence was summarized by 4 categories: (1) medication-related process outcomes (eg, potentially inappropriate medication [PIM] and potential prescribing omission reductions), (2) clinical and functional outcomes, (3) health care use and economic outcomes, and (4) acceptability of the intervention.FindingsFourteen SRs were identified (3 from the previous overview), 7 of which included meta-analyses, representing 179 unique published studies. Nine SRs examined medication-related process outcomes (low to very low evidence quality). Systematic reviews using pooled analyses found significant reductions in the number of PIMs, potential prescribing omissions, and total number of medications, and improvements in medication appropriateness. Twelve SRs examined clinical and functional outcomes (very low to moderate evidence quality). Five SRs examined mortality; all mortality meta-analyses were null, but studies with longer follow-up periods found greater reductions in mortality. Five SRs examined falls incidence; results were predominantly null save for a meta-analysis in which PIMs were discontinued. Of the 8 SRs examining quality of life, most (7) found predominantly null effects. Ten SRs examined hospitalizations and readmissions (very low to moderate evidence quality) and 4 examined emergency department visits (very low to low evidence quality). One SR found significant reductions in hospitalizations and readmissions among higher-intensity medication reviews with face-to-face patient components. Another meta-analysis found a null effect. Of the 7 SRs without meta-analyses for hospitalizations and readmissions, all had predominantly null results. Two of 4 SRs found reductions in emergency department visits. Two SRs examined acceptability (very low evidence quality), finding wide variation in the adoption of polypharmacy-related interventions.Conclusions and relevanceThis updated systematic overview noted little evidence of an association between polypharmacy-related interventions and reduced important clinical and health care use outcomes. More evidence is needed regarding which interventions are most useful and which populations would benefit most.

Project description:PURPOSE:To systematically evaluate and summarize evidence across multiple systematic reviews (SRs) examining interventions addressing polypharmacy. SUMMARY:MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) were searched for SRs evaluating interventions addressing polypharmacy in adults published from January 2004 to February 2017. Two authors independently screened, appraised, and extracted information. SRs with Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) scores below 8 were excluded. After extraction of relevant conclusions from each SR, evidence was summarized and conclusions compared. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess evidence quality. Six SRs met the inclusion criteria, 4 of which used meta-analytic pooling. Five SRs focused on older adults. Four were not restricted to any specific disease type, whereas 1 focused on proton pump inhibitors and another focused on patients with severe dementia. Care settings and measured outcomes varied widely. SRs examining the impact on patient-centered outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, patient satisfaction, and utilization, found inconsistent evidence regarding the benefit of polypharmacy interventions, but most concluded that interventions had either null or uncertain impact. Two SRs assessing medication appropriateness found very low-quality evidence of modest improvements with polypharmacy interventions. CONCLUSION:An overview of SRs of interventions to address polypharmacy found 6 recent and high-quality SRs, mostly focused on older adults, in which both process and outcome measures were used to evaluate interventions. Despite the low quality of evidence in the underlying primary studies, both SRs that assessed medication appropriateness found evidence that polypharmacy interventions improved it. However, there was no consistent evidence of any impact on downstream patient-centered outcomes such as healthcare utilization, morbidity, or mortality.

Dataset Information

Addressing the polypharmacy challenge in older people with multimorbidity (APOLLO-MM): study protocol for an in-depth ethnographic case study in primary care.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics approval

Dissemination

Publications

Addressing the polypharmacy challenge in older people with multimorbidity (APOLLO-MM): study protocol for an in-depth ethnographic case study in primary care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets