What is already known about this subject • Polypharmacy has been linked to heightened risk of occurrence of drug‐related problems (DRPs) and a detrimental health outcome. • Polypharmacy has been variously defined; in research studies a commonly applied definition has been the concomitant use of five or more drugs. • The value of using a definite number of drugs as a cut‐off to describe polypharmacy as a risk factor for the occurrence of DRPs has not been validated. What this study adds • Nearly half of the patients admitted to general hospitals used five or more drugs; during the hospital stay these patients were prescribed as many new drugs as those admitted with fewer drugs. • The presence of DRPs increased approximately linearly with the number of drugs used, for the range of one to >11 drugs. • To set a strict cut‐off to identify polypharmacy and declare that using more than this number of drugs represents a potential risk for occurrence of DRPs, is of limited value in clinical practice. Aim To investigate whether polypharmacy defined as a definite number of drugs is a suitable indicator for describing the risk of occurrence of drug‐related problems (DRPs) in a hospital setting. Methods Patients admitted to six internal medicine and two rheumatology departments in five hospitals were consecutively included and followed during the hospital stay, with particular attention to medication and DRPs. Comparisons were made between patients admitted with five or more drugs and with less than five drugs. Clinical pharmacists assessed DRPs by reviewing medical records and by participating in multidisciplinary team discussions. Results Of a total of 827 patients, 391 (47%) used five or more drugs on admission. Patients admitted with five or more and less than five drugs were prescribed the same number of drugs after admission: 4.1 vs. 3.9 drugs [P = 0.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) − 0.57, 0.23], respectively. The proportion of drugs used on admission which was associated with DRPs was similar in the patient group admitted with five or more drugs and in those admitted with less than five drugs. The number of DRPs per patient increased approximately linearly with the increase in number of drugs used; one unit increase in number of drugs yielded a 8.6% increase in the number of DRPs (95% CI 1.07, 1.10). Conclusion The number of DRPs per patient was linearly related to the number of drugs used on admission. To set a strict cut‐off to identify polypharmacy and declare that using more than this number of drugs represents a potential risk for occurrence of DRPs, is of limited value when assessing DRPs in a clinical setting.

Drug-related problems are frequent and may result in reduced quality of life, and even morbidity and mortality. Many studies have shown that clinical pharmacists can effectively identify and prevent clinically significant drug-related problems and that physicians acknowledge and act on the clinical pharmacist's suggestions for interventions to the drug-related problems. A pro-active rather than a reactive approach on the part of the pharmacists seems prudent for obtaining most benefit. This includes participation of pharmacists in the multidisciplinary team discussions -at the stage of ordering and prescribing -where all types of drug-related problems, including also potential problems, should be discussed. In addition, counselling by pharmacists about medication on discharge and follow-up after discharge resulted in better outcomes. Furthermore, clinical pharmacists can positively influence other outcomes, such as improvement of levels of markers for drug use (e.g. optimization of lipid levels, anticoagulation levels and blood pressure). Some studies have reported positive effects on hard clinical outcomes, such as reduced length of stay, fewer re-admissions and fewer disease events (e.g. heart failure events and thromboembolism). However, more studies should be undertaken with larger patient populations, including patients from multiple sites. More knowledge about patient-specific factors that predict improved care is also needed. In conclusion, there is increasing evidence that participation and interventions of clinical pharmacists in health care positively influence clinical practice.Drugs are an important input factor in the Western healthcare system. However, it has been shown that drugs may give negative health outcomes, such as increased morbidity and mortality [1][2][3] and reduced quality of life [4]. Moreover, lack of effect of the chosen drug can also be a challenge in the management of patients, and often optimal levels of blood glucose, cholesterol or blood pressure are not reached during drug treatment [5]. The reason could be the choice of drug or dosage, or patient factors such as drug-disease interactions or adherence problems.A cornerstone of clinical pharmacy is the identification, solving and prevention of drug-related problems. A drug-related problem is defined as 'an event or circumstance involving drug therapy that actually or potentially interferes with desired health outcomes' [6]. Drug-related problems have been categorized by different research groups into different classification systems. In short, these problems deal with choice of drug, drug dosages, adverse drug reactions, drug interactions, lack of monitoring of drug effects/toxicity, and adherence problems. Drug-related problems include both actual and potential problems. An actual problem has resulted in clinical manifestations (e.g. a drug-related rash, an adverse drug reaction), or therapy failure due to incorrect dosage. A potential problem is not manifest, but if left unresolved, it may lead to drug-related harm ...

The majority of hospitalised patients in our study had DRPs. The number of drugs used and the number of clinical/pharmacological risk factors significantly and independently influenced the risk for DRPs. Procedures for identification of, and intervention on, actual and potential DRPs, along with awareness of drugs carrying a high risk for DRPs, are important elements of drug therapy and may contribute to diminishing drug-related morbidity and mortality.

Among patients admitted to general hospitals, a considerable proportion had renal impairment. In patients with reduced renal function, renal risk drugs were widely used and often in combination. DRPs were frequently associated with the use of renal risk drugs.

ObjectivesTo investigate drug regimen changes during hospitalisation and explore how these changes are handled after patients are transferred back into the care of their general practitioners (GPs).DesignCohort study.SettingPatients in this multicentre study had undergone at least one change in their drug regimens at discharge from the general medicine departments at six hospitals in Norway. These changes were altered doses, discontinuation of drugs or start of new drugs. Clinical pharmacists visited the patients’ GPs 4–5 months after patient discharge and recorded any additional drug regimen changes.ResultsIn total, 105 patients (mean age 76.1 years, 54.3% women) completed the study. On average, they used 5.6 drugs at admission (range 0–16) and 7.6 drugs at discharge (range 1–17). On average, 4.4 drug changes per patient (SD 2.7, range 1–16) were made at the hospital, and 3.4 drug changes per patient (SD 2.9, range 0–14) within 4–5 months of discharge. Of the 465 drug changes made in hospital, 153 were changed again after discharge (mean 1.5 per patient, SD 1.8, range 0–13). The drug regimens of 90 of these 105 patients were changed after discharge. The OR for extensive drug changes after discharge (≥ 4 changes) increased significantly with the number of drugs used at discharge from hospital (OR=1.29, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.59). Only 68 of 105 discharge notes contained complete drug lists, and only 24 of the discharge notes were received by the GPs within 7 days.ConclusionsIn addition to the extensive changes in drug regimens during hospitalisation, almost equally extensive changes were made in the initial months after discharge. Surveillance of drug regimens is particularly necessary in the period immediately after hospital discharge.

BackgroundAntibiotic resistance is a global health threat. Public knowledge is considered a prerequisite for appropriate use of antibiotics and limited spread of antibiotic resistance. Our aim was to examine the level of knowledge of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance among Norwegian pharmacy customers, and to assess to which degree beliefs, attitudes and sociodemographic factors are associated with this knowledge.MethodsA questionnaire based, cross-sectional study was conducted among pharmacy customers in three Norwegian cities. The questionnaire covered 1) knowledge of antibiotics (13 statements) and antibiotic resistance (10 statements), 2) the general beliefs about medicines questionnaire (BMQ general) (three subdomains, four statements each), 3) attitudes toward antibiotic use (four statements), and 4) sociodemographic factors, life style and health. High knowledge level was defined as > 66% of maximum score. Factors associated with knowledge of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance were investigated through univariate and multiple linear regression. Hierarchical model regression was used to estimate a population average knowledge score weighted for age, gender and level of education.ResultsAmong 877 participants, 57% had high knowledge of antibiotics in general and 71% had high knowledge of antibiotic resistance. More than 90% knew that bacteria can become resistant against antibiotics and that unnecessary use of antibiotics can make them less effective. Simultaneously, more than 30% erroneously stated that antibiotics are effective against viruses, colds or influenza. Factors positively associated with antibiotic knowledge were health professional background, high education level, and a positive view on the value of medications in general. Male gender, a less restrictive attitude toward antibiotic use, and young age were negatively associated with antibiotic knowledge. The mean overall antibiotic knowledge score was relatively high (15.6 out of maximum 23 with estimated weighted population score at 14.8).ConclusionsDespite a high level of knowledge of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance among Norwegian pharmacy customers, there are obvious knowledge gaps. We suggest that action is taken to increase the knowledge level, and particularly target people in vocational, male dominated occupations outside the health service, and primary/secondary school curricula.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-6409-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

We found substantial differences of up to 7.5-fold in pediatric antimicrobial use across several industrialized countries from Europe, Asia, and North America. These data reinforce the need to develop strategies to decrease the unnecessary use of antimicrobial agents.

The majority of patients had one or more DRPs. The problems identified as DRPs by the pharmacists were accepted as such by the physicians and to a high degree acted upon. Both clinical significance of the DRP and patient characteristics influenced physician immediate acceptance rate. Some DRPs could be solved by direct contact with nurses or the patients. Awareness of DRPs increases through participation of pharmacists in the multidisciplinary therapeutic hospital team.