Because inappropriate prescribing is prevalent in individuals aged 65 and older, various criteria to assess it have been developed. This study's aim was to systematically review articles that describe criteria for assessing inappropriate prescribing in individuals aged 65 and older and to define the circumstances of their use (explicit/implicit), origins, development processes, and content. A systematic search was conducted on MEDLINE and PubMed (1990-2010) and augmented with a manual search. Original articles written in English were included if they described the development of the criteria and were aimed at people aged 65 and older. Articles that described criteria applicable only in hospital settings, specific drugs, or a particular disease or condition were excluded. Sixteen of 535 articles met the inclusion criteria. They described 14 criteria, half originating in the United States. The English-language restriction limited the search results. Most criteria were explicit, consensus validated, based totally or partly on Beers criteria, and focused on pharmacological appropriateness of prescribing and some were old. Drug- and disease-oriented explicit criteria require regular updating and are country specific. Implicit, person-specific criteria are universal and do not need updating, although their use requires up-to-date professional skills. Unlike explicit criteria, implicit criteria have been validated in people. Some of the 14 criteria were noncomprehensive, mainly because of the intended purpose. To conclude, different criteria exist for optimizing prescribing for individuals aged 65 and older. Possible deficiencies must be recognized and trade-offs made when selecting criteria for use. In the future, more-comprehensive and -timely criteria are needed.

BackgroundThe magnitude of safety risks related to medications of the older adults has been evidenced by numerous studies, but less is known of how to manage and prevent these risks in different health care settings. The aim of this study was to coordinate resources for prospective medication risk management of home care clients ≥ 65 years in primary care and to develop a study design for demonstrating effectiveness of the procedure.MethodsHealth care units involved in the study are from primary care in Lohja, Southern Finland: home care (191 consented clients), the public healthcare center, and a private community pharmacy. System based risk management theory and action research method was applied to construct the collaborative procedure utilizing each profession’s existing resources in medication risk management of older home care clients. An inventory of clinical measures in usual clinical practice and systematic review of rigorous study designs was utilized in effectiveness study design.DiscussionThe new coordinated medication management model (CoMM) has the following 5 stages: 1) practical nurses are trained to identify clinically significant drug-related problems (DRPs) during home visits and report those to the clinical pharmacist. Clinical pharmacist prepares the cases for 2) an interprofessional triage meeting (50–70 cases/meeting of 2 h) where decisions are made on further action, e.g., more detailed medication reviews, 3) community pharmacists conduct necessary medication reviews and each patients’ physician makes final decisions on medication changes needed. The final stages concern 4) implementation and 5) follow-up of medication changes. Randomized controlled trial (RCT) was developed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the procedure.The developed procedure is feasible for screening and reviewing medications of a high number of older home care clients to identify clients with severe DRPs and provide interventions to solve them utilizing existing primary care resources.Trial registrationThe study is registered in the Clinical Trials.gov (NCT02545257). Registration date September 9 2015.

The Delphi process resulted in a structured DRP Risk Assessment Tool that is focused on the highest priority DRPs that should be identified and resolved. The tool also assists the PNs to identify solutions to these problems, which is a unique feature compared to similarly purposed prior tools.

BackgroundAs populations are aging, a growing number of home care clients are frail and use multiple, complex medications. Combined with the lack of coordination of care this may pose uncontrolled polypharmacy and potential patient safety risks. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a care coordination intervention on medication risks identified in drug regimens of older home care clients over a one-year period.MethodsTwo-arm, parallel, cluster randomized controlled trial with baseline and follow-up assessment at 12 months. The study was conducted in Primary Care in Lohja, Finland: all 5 home care units, the public healthcare center, and a private community pharmacy. Participants: All consented home care clients aged > 65 years, using at least one prescription medicine who were assessed at baseline and at 12 months. Intervention: Practical nurses were trained to make the preliminary medication risk assessment during home visits and report findings to the coordinating pharmacist. The coordinating pharmacist prepared the cases for the triage meeting with the physician and home care nurse to decide on further actions. Each patient’s physician made the final decisions on medication changes needed.Outcomes were measured as changes in medication risks: use of potentially inappropriate medications and psychotropics; anticholinergic and serotonergic load; drug-drug interactions.ResultsParticipants (n = 129) characteristics: mean age 82.8 years, female 69.8%, mean number of prescription medicines in use 13.1. The intervention did not show an impact on the medication risks between the original intervention group and the control group in the intention to treat analysis, but the per protocol analysis indicated tendency for effectiveness, particularly in optimizing central nervous system medication use. Half (50.0%) of the participants with a potential need for medication changes, agreed on in the triage meeting, had none of the medication changes actually implemented.ConclusionThe care coordination intervention used in this study indicated tendency for effectiveness when implemented as planned. Even though the outcome of the intervention was not optimal, the value of this paper is in discussing the real world experiences and challenges of implementing new practices in home care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02545257). Registered September 9 2015.

The use of PIMs among outpatients aged ≥65 years in Finland (14.7%) was less than in several earlier large-scale studies in other countries (17-42%) and reimbursement costs were modest, mainly as a result of the limited availability in Finland of medicines identified as PIMs by the Beers 2003 criteria. However, benzodiazepines were commonly used and actions to improve medication safety should target reducing their use.

The Drug-Related Problem Risk Assessment Tool turned out to be feasible among practical nurses. The brief training on the content and use of the tool seems to be sufficient for ensuring reliable use of the tool.

Purpose This study aims to systematically review studies describing screening tools that assess the risk for drug-related problems (DRPs) in older adults (≥ 60 years). The focus of the review is to compare DRP risks listed in different tools and describe their development methods and validation. Methods The systematic search was conducted using evidence-based medicine, Medline Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from January 1, 1985, to April 7, 2016. Publications describing general DRP risk assessment tools for older adults written in English were included. Disease, therapy, and drug-specific tools were excluded. Outcome measures included an assessment tool's content, development methods, and validation assessment. Results The search produced 15 publications describing 11 DRP risk assessment tools. Three major categories of risks for DRPs included (1) patient or caregiver related risks; (2) pharmacotherapy-related risks; and (3) medication use process-related risks. Of all the risks included in the tools only 8 criteria appeared in at least 4 of the tools, problems remembering to take the medication being the most common (n=7). Validation assessments varied and content validation was the most commonly conducted (n = 9). Reliability assessment was conducted for 6 tools, most commonly by calculating internal consistency (n = 3) and inter-rater reliability (n = 2). Conclusions The considerable variety between the contents of the tools indicates that there is no consensus on the risk factors for DRPs that should be screened in older adults taking multiple medicines. Further research is needed to improve the accuracy and timeliness of the DRP risk assessment tools.

Finland’s community pharmacy system provides an example of a privately-owned regulated system being proactively developed by the profession and its stakeholders. Community pharmacists have a legal duty to promote safe and rational medicine use in outpatient care. The development of professionally oriented practice has been nationally coordinated since the 1990s with the support of a national steering group consisting of professional bodies, authorities, pharmacy schools and continuing education centers. The primary focus has been in patient counseling services and public health programs. The services have extended towards prospective medication risk management applying evidence-based tools, databases and digitalization. Research has been essential in informing progress by indicating high-risk patients, medications, practices and processes needing improvement. Despite the commitment of the profession and pharmacy owners, large-scale implementation of services has been challenging because of lack of remuneration, the pharmacy income still consisting primarily of sale of prescription and nonprescription medicines. Policy documents by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health have supported the extension of the community pharmacists’ role beyond traditional dispensing to promote rational pharmacotherapy. The current roadmap by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health emphasizes ensuring adequate regional availability and accessibility of medicines, regardless of the future pharmacy system. It also emphasizes the importance of strong regulation on pharmacy business operations and sale of medicines to ensure medication safety. At the same time, the roadmap requires that the regulation must enable implementation of new patient-oriented services and procedures, and further promote digitalization in service provision. Competition and balance of funding should be enhanced, e.g., through price competition, but the risk of pharmaceutical market concentration should be managed. The regulation should also consider influence of the new social and health care system on drug delivery. Year 2021 will be crucial for making long-term political decisions on the future direction of tasks and finances of Finnish community pharmacies in this framework. Government-funded studies are underway to guide decision making. Ongoing Covid-19 crisis has demonstrated the readiness of Finnish community pharmacies to adapt fast to meet the changing societal needs.