This study was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant number: MOP-230207). Part of the study was also funded by Pfizer Canada, Leo Pharma, and Amgen. The authors declare that they have no relevant financial interests. Study concept and design were contributed by Quintana-Bárcena, Lord, and Lalonde. Quintana-Bárcena, Lord, and Lizotte were responsible for the data analysis, and Quintana-Bárcena and Berbiche performed the statistical analysis. The manuscript was written by Quintana-Bárcena and Lalonde and revised by Quintana-Bárcena and Lalonde, along with the other authors.

A set of criteria developed for use in the community pharmacy setting for evaluating the severity of DRPs in CKD proved to be reliable and correlated with clinical implicit judgment.

Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Purpose Patients on hemodialysis have a high risk of medication-related problems. Studies using deprescribing algorithms to reduce the number of inappropriate medications in this population have been published, but none have used a patient-partnership approach. Our study evaluated the impact of a similar intervention with a patient-partnership approach. Methods The objective was to describe the implementation of a pharmacist-led intervention with a patient-partnership approach using deprescribing algorithms and its impact on the reduction of inappropriate medications in patients on hemodialysis. Eight algorithms were developed by pharmacists and nephrologists to assess the appropriateness of medications. Pharmacists identified patients taking targeted medications. Following patient enrollment, pharmacists assessed medications with patients and applied the algorithms. With patient consent, deprescription was suggested to nephrologists if applicable. Specific data on each targeted medication were collected at 4 and 16 weeks. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the effects of the deprescribing intervention. Results Of 270 patients, 256 were taking at least one targeted medication. Of the 122 patients taking at least one targeted medication who were approached to participate, 66 were included in the study. At enrollment, these patients were taking 252 targeted medications, of which 59 (23.4%) were determined to be inappropriate. Deprescription was initiated for 35 of these 59 medications (59.3%). At 4 weeks, 33 of the 59 medications (55.9%) were still deprescribed, while, at 16 weeks, 27 of the 59 medications (45.8%) were still deprescribed. Proton pump inhibitors and benzodiazepines or Z-drugs were the most common inappropriate medications, and allopurinol was the most deprescribed medication. Conclusion A pharmacist-led intervention with a patient-partnership approach and using deprescribing algorithms reduced the number of inappropriate medications in patients on hemodialysis.

When used by health professionals in a pharmacist-managed anticoagulation clinic, the CoaguChek S is reliable, valid and easy to use. However, its validity tends to decrease as the INR increases, possibly due to the low sensitivity of the thromboplastin. If the CoaguChek S INR is supratherapeutic, we would therefore recommend confirming the results with a standard laboratory measurement.