Dataset Information

Effects of an interprofessional deprescribing intervention in Swiss nursing homes: the Individual Deprescribing Intervention (IDeI) randomised controlled trial

ABSTRACT:

Background

Deprescribing polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) has been shown to be beneficial to nursing home (NH) residents' health. Medication reviews are the most widely studied deprescribing intervention; in a previous trial, we showed that another intervention, a deprescribing-focused interprofessional quality circle, can reduce the use of inappropriate medications at the NH level. However, this intervention cannot account for the variety of the residents’ clinical situations. Therefore, we trialled a subsequent intervention in NH that enacted the quality circle intervention in the previous year.

Methods

In 7 NHs, the most heavily medicated residents were recruited and randomised to receive usual care or the intervention. The intervention was a pharmacist-led, deprescribing-focused medication review, followed by the creation of an individualised treatment modification plan in collaboration with nurses and physicians. Intervention’s effects were assessed after four months on the number and dose of PIMs used, quality of life, and safety outcomes (mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and use of physical restraints). Data were analysed using Poisson multivariate regression models.

Results

Sixty-two NH residents participated, falling short of the expected 100 participants; 4 died before initial data collection. Participants used a very high number of drugs (median 15, inter-quartile range [12-19]) and PIMs (median 5, IQR [3-7]) at baseline. The intervention did not reduce the number of PIMs prescribed to the participants; however, it significantly decreased their dose (incidence rate ratio 0.763, CI95 [0.594; 0.979]), in particular for chronic drugs (IRR 0.716, CI95 [0.546; 0.938]). No adverse effects were seen on mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and restraints use, but, in the intervention group, three participants experienced adverse events that required the reintroduction of withdrawn treatments, and a decrease in quality of life is possible.

Conclusions

As it did not reach its recruitment target, this trial should be seen as exploratory. Results indicate that, following a NH-level deprescribing intervention, a resident-level intervention can further reduce some aspects of PIMs use. Great attention must be paid to residents’ well-being when further developing such deprescribing interventions, as a possible reduction in quality of life was found in the intervention group, and some participants suffered adverse events following deprescribing.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03688542, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03688542), registered on 31.08.2018.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02465-7.

SUBMITTER: Cateau D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8603597 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPotentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are common among nursing homes (NH) residents, as is polypharmacy. Deprescribing has emerged in the past decade as a safe and effective way to reduce the use of PIMs and improve patient outcomes. However, effective deprescribing interventions are expensive, as they require specialised staff and a great amount of time for each resident. The Quality Circle Deprescribing Module (QC-DeMo) intervention was designed to be less resource-intensive than medication reviews, the current deprescribing gold standard. It consists of a QC session in which physicians, nurses, and pharmacists define a local deprescribing consensus for specific PIMs classes, which is then implemented in the NH. The intervention was trialled in a RCT, with the NH as unit of analysis.MethodsAfter randomisation, intervention NHs enacted the QC-DeMo at the start of the follow-up year. The primary outcomes were the proportion of PIM galenic units and number of PIM defined daily dose per average resident and per day (DDD/res). PIM status was assessed by a combination of the 2015 Beers list and the Norwegian General Practice-Nursing Home criteria. Secondary outcomes were the number of DDD/res to avoid and to reevaluate; safety outcomes were mortality, hospitalisations, falls, and use of physical restraints. Outcomes were evaluated at follow-up using linear regression models, adjusting for the outcome baseline values.ResultsFifty-eight NHs took part in the trial; no individual residents were recruited. The intervention did not reduce the primary outcomes, but a strong trend towards reduction was seen for the number of PIM DDD/res, which accounts for the doses used. PIM DDD/res to reevaluate were significantly reduced, mostly through a reduction in the use of proton-pump inhibitors. Falls and use of physical restraints were not affected, but a statistical interaction between the mission of the NH (geriatric unit or specialised dementia unit) and the intervention group was seen for mortality and hospitalisations.ConclusionsThe QC-DeMo intervention can reduce the use of some PIM classes, and could usefully complement other deprescribing interventions.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03688542 ), registered on 26.09.2018, retrospectively registered.

Project description:BackgroundPolypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are still frequent among older adults in nursing homes. Deprescribing is an intervention that has been shown to be effective in reducing their use. However, the implementation of deprescribing in clinical practice has not yet been widely evaluated. The Quality Circle Deprescribing Module (QC-DeMo) intervention has been trialled through an effectiveness-implementation hybrid type 2 design. The intervention consists of a quality circle workshop session between healthcare professionals HCPs (physicians, nurses, and pharmacists) within a nursing home, in which they define a consensus to deprescribe specific PIMs classes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the QC-DeMo intervention in nursing homes.MethodsThis observational study focuses on the implementation part of the QC-DeMo trial. Implementation was based on the Framework for Implementation of Pharmacy Services (FISpH). Questionnaires at baseline and follow-up were used to evaluate reach, adoption, implementation effectiveness, fidelity, implementation, maintenance and the implementation strategies. Other data were collected from the QC-DeMo trial and routine data collected as part of the integrated pharmacy service where the QC-Demo trial was embedded. Implementation strategies included training of pharmacists, integration of the intervention into an existing quality circle dynamic and definition of tailored strategies to operationalise the consensus by each nursing home.ResultsThe QC-DeMo intervention was successfully implemented in 26 nursing homes in terms of reach, fidelity, adoption, implementation and implementation effectiveness. However, the intervention was found to be implemented with low maintenance as none of the nursing homes repeated the intervention after the trial. Implementation strategies were well received by HCPs: training was adequate according to pharmacists. Pre-existing quality circle dynamic facilitated interprofessional collaboration as involvement and support of each HCP was rated as high. HCPs recognized a specific and important role for each HCP in the deprescribing process. The most relevant tailored strategies to implement the consensus defined by each nursing home were identification of the patients by the pharmacist and a systematic review of medication's patients.ConclusionsThe implementation of a Quality Circle on Deprescribing is feasible but its maintenance in practice remains challenging. This study explores multiple implementation outcomes to better inform future implementation efforts of these types of interventions.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03688542 ), registered on 26.09.2018.

Project description:IntroductionAn ageing population has become an urgent concern for Asia in recent times. In nursing homes, polypharmacy has also become a compounding issue. Deprescribing practice is an evidence-based strategy to provide a better outcome in this group of patients; however, its implementation in nursing homes is often challenging, and prospective outcome data on deprescribing practice in the elderly is lacking. Our study assesses the implementation of team-care deprescribing to understand the benefits of this practice in geriatric setting and to explore the factors affecting deprescribing practice.Methods and analysisThis multicentre prospective study consists of a prestudy interview questionnaire, and a preintervention and postintervention study to be conducted in the nursing home setting on residents at least 65 years old and on five or more medications. We will employ a cluster randomised stepped-wedge interventional design, based on a five-step (reviewing, checking, discussion, communication and documentation) team-care deprescribing practice coupled with the use of a deprescribing guide (consisting of Beers and STOPP criteria, as well as drug interaction checking), to assess the health and pharmacoeconomic outcome in nursing homes' practice. Primary outcome measures of the intervention will consist of fall risks using a fall risk assessment tool. Other outcomes assessed include fall rates, pill burden including number of pills per day, number of doses per day and number of medications prescribed. Cost-related measures will include the use of cost-benefit analysis, which is calculated from the medication cost savings from deprescribing. For the prestudy interview questionnaire, findings will be analysed qualitatively using thematic analysis.Ethics and disseminationThis study is approved by the Domain Specific Review Board of National Healthcare Group, Singapore (2016/00422) and Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (2016-1430-7791). The study findings shall be disseminated in international conferences and peer-reviewed publications. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02863341), Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundDementia-care mapping (DCM) is a cyclic intervention aiming at reducing neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia in nursing homes. Alongside an 18-month cluster-randomized controlled trial in which we studied the effectiveness of DCM on residents and staff outcomes, we investigated differences in costs of care between DCM and usual care in nursing homes.MethodsDementia special care units were randomly assigned to DCM or usual care. Nurses from the intervention care homes received DCM training, a DCM organizational briefing day and conducted the 4-months DCM-intervention twice during the study. A single DCM cycle consists of observation, feedback to the staff, and action plans for the residents. We measured costs related to health care consumption, falls and psychotropic drug use at the resident level and absenteeism at the staff level. Data were extracted from resident files and the nursing home records. Prizes were determined using the Dutch manual of health care cost and the cost prices delivered by a pharmacy and a nursing home. Total costs were evaluated by means of linear mixed-effect models for longitudinal data, with the unit as a random effect to correct for dependencies within units.Results34 units from 11 nursing homes, including 318 residents and 376 nursing staff members participated in the cost analyses. Analyses showed no difference in total costs. However certain changes within costs could be noticed. The intervention group showed lower costs associated with outpatient hospital appointments over time (p = 0.05) than the control group. In both groups, the number of falls, costs associated with the elderly-care physician and nurse practitioner increased equally during the study (p<0.02).ConclusionsDCM is a cost-neutral intervention. It effectively reduces outpatient hospital appointments compared to usual care. Other considerations than costs, such as nursing homes' preferences, may determine whether they adopt the DCM method.Trial registrationDutch Trials Registry NTR2314.

Project description:ObjectivesDeprescribing has been proposed as a way to reduce polypharmacy in frail older people. We aimed to reduce the number of medicines consumed by people living in residential aged care facilities (RACF). Secondary objectives were to explore the effect of deprescribing on survival, falls, fractures, hospital admissions, cognitive, physical, and bowel function, quality of life, and sleep.MethodsNinety-five people aged over 65 years living in four RACF in rural mid-west Western Australia were randomised in an open study. The intervention group (n = 47) received a deprescribing intervention, the planned cessation of non-beneficial medicines. The control group (n = 48) received usual care. Participants were monitored for twelve months from randomisation. Primary outcome was change in the mean number of unique regular medicines. All outcomes were assessed at baseline, six, and twelve months.ResultsStudy participants had a mean age of 84.3 ± 6.9 years and 52% were female. Intervention group participants consumed 9.6 ± 5.0 and control group participants consumed 9.5 ± 3.6 unique regular medicines at baseline. Of the 348 medicines targeted for deprescribing (7.4 ± 3.8 per person, 78% of regular medicines), 207 medicines (4.4 ± 3.4 per person, 59% of targeted medicines) were successfully discontinued. The mean change in number of regular medicines at 12 months was -1.9 ± 4.1 in intervention group participants and +0.1 ± 3.5 in control group participants (estimated difference 2.0 ± 0.9, 95%CI 0.08, 3.8, p = 0.04). Twelve intervention participants and 19 control participants died within 12 months of randomisation (26% versus 40% mortality, p = 0.16, HR 0.60, 95%CI 0.30 to 1.22) There were no significant differences between groups in other secondary outcomes. The main limitations of this study were the open design and small participant numbers.ConclusionsDeprescribing reduced the number of regular medicines consumed by frail older people living in residential care with no significant adverse effects on survival or other clinical outcomes.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12611000370909.

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine whether humour therapy reduces depression (primary outcome), agitation and behavioural disturbances and improves social engagement and quality-of-life in nursing home residents.DesignThe Sydney Multisite Intervention of LaughterBosses and ElderClowns study was a single-blind cluster randomised controlled trial of humour therapy.Setting35 Sydney nursing homes.ParticipantsAll eligible residents within geographically defined areas within each nursing home were invited to participate.InterventionProfessional 'ElderClowns' provided 9-12 weekly humour therapy sessions, augmented by resident engagement by trained staff 'LaughterBosses'. Controls received usual care.MeasurementsDepression scores on the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia, agitation scores on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory, behavioural disturbance scores on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory, social engagement scores on the withdrawal subscale of Multidimensional Observation Scale for Elderly Subjects, and self-rated and proxy-rated quality-of-life scores on a health-related quality-of-life tool for dementia, the DEMQOL. All outcomes were measured at the participant level by researchers blind to group assignment.RandomisationSites were stratified by size and level of care then assigned to group using a random number generator.ResultsSeventeen nursing homes (189 residents) received the intervention and 18 homes (209 residents) received usual care. Groups did not differ significantly over time on the primary outcome of depression, or on behavioural disturbances other than agitation, social engagement and quality of life. The secondary outcome of agitation was significantly reduced in the intervention group compared with controls over 26 weeks (time by group interaction adjusted for covariates: p=0.011). The mean difference in change from baseline to 26 weeks in Blom-transformed agitation scores after adjustment for covariates was 0.17 (95% CI 0.004 to 0.34, p=0.045).ConclusionsHumour therapy did not significantly reduce depression but significantly reduced agitation.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry -ACTRN12611000462987.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Depression is a common disorder among older people living in residential aged care facilities. Several trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of behavioural therapies in treating depressive symptoms in older adults living in the community and in residential aged care. Behavioural Activation is demonstrably effective even when delivered by non-specialists (staff without formal psychological training), although strategies for adapting its use in residential aged care facilities are yet to be explored. This study will determine whether training residential care staff in the use of a structured Behavioural Activation programme is more effective at decreasing depressive symptoms among older residents than internet-based training about depression recognition and management alone. METHOD AND ANALYSIS:The behavioural activation in nursing homes to treat depression (BAN-Dep) trial is a pragmatic two-arm parallel clustered randomised controlled trial. It will recruit 666 residents aged 60 or older from 100 residential aged care facilities, which will be randomly assigned to the Behavioural Activation or control intervention. Staff in both treatment groups will be encouraged to complete the Beyondblue Professional Education to Aged Care e-learning programme to improve their recognition of and ability to respond to depression in older adults. Selected staff from intervention facilities will undergo additional training to deliver an 8-module Behavioural Activation programme to residents with subthreshold symptoms of depression-they will receive ongoing Mental support from trained Behavioural Activation therapists. Outcome measures will be collected by blind research officer at baseline and after 3, 6 and 12 months. The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 is the primary outcome measure of the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The trial will comply with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki for Human Rights and is overseen by the University of Western Australia (reference RA/4/20/4234) and Melbourne Health (reference number HREC/18/MH/47) Ethics Committees. The results of this research project will be disseminated through publications and/or presentations in a variety of media to health professionals, academics, clinicians and the public. Only de-identified group data will be presented. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ACTRN12618000634279.