Utility of a trigger tool (TRIGGER-CHRON) to detect adverse events associated with high-alert medications in patients with multimorbidity

Use of a trigger tool to describe and screen drug-related hospital admissions in older adults: the TRIGGAge retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Drug-related hospital admissions (DRAs) can account for 5%-40% of total hospital admissions in older adults, with a significant proportion deemed preventable. To increase the detection of DRAs, in 2021, a revised trigger tool listing 21 frequent causes of admissions and medications at risk was proposed. This study aimed to describe DRAs using this trigger tool in a French acute geriatric ward and to assess the performance of the tool.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study in a 20-bed geriatric unit including all patients hospitalised in 2023. During the first quarter of 2024, each patient's chart was adjudicated by using a two-step standardised review procedure to assess whether the admission was a DRA. The potentially at cause medications and reasons for admission were also assessed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 483 patients were hospitalised in the acute-care geriatric ward (mean age 86.7 ± 6.15 years). After adjudication, 207 admissions (43%) were identified as DRAs; 70% were considered preventable. The main causes of DRAs were falls/fractures (33%), bleeding (23%) and delirium (14%). The drugs most frequently responsible were diuretics (21%), renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (20%) and direct oral anticoagulants (15%). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the tool for detecting DRAs was 90% (95% CI 88-93) and 72% (68-76), respectively. After adjudication, the trigger tool helped detect 83% more DRAs as compared with the attending geriatrician.

CONCLUSION

DRAs are frequent in a geriatric population and often preventable. Their detection may be improved by the use of a trigger tool.

Identification of potentially causative drugs associated with hypotension: A scoping review

Drug-induced hypotension can be harmful and may lead to hospital admissions. The occurrence of hypotension during drug therapy is preventable through increased awareness. This scoping review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of antihypertensive and nonantihypertensive drugs associated with hypotension in adults. A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library, focusing on studies from January 2013 to May 2023. Search terms were developed to capture key concepts related to hypotension and adverse drug events in adults while excluding terms related to allergic reactions, phytotherapy and studies involving paediatric, pregnant or animal populations. The eligibility criteria included a wide range of study types evaluating hypotension as an adverse drug event across all healthcare settings. Relevant information was extracted from the included studies, while identified drugs associated with hypotension were categorised into drug classes. The review was reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. In 97 eligible studies, we identified 26 antihypertensive drugs grouped into nine different antihypertensive classes and 158 other drugs grouped into 22 other drug classes. Common antihypertensive classes were angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta blockers and diuretics. Frequently reported nonantihypertensive classes were neuroleptics, alpha-1 blockers for benign prostatic hyperplasia, benzodiazepines, opioids and antidepressants. The results highlight the importance of healthcare professionals being aware of nonantihypertensive drugs that can cause hypotension. This review provides a basis for future systematic reviews to explore dose-dependence, drug-drug interactions and confounding factors.

Polypharmacy and high-alert medications in patients with nasally placed feeding tube on admission and at hospital discharge: Multicenter cross-sectional study

Background

Polypharmacy and the use of high-alert medications in patients with nasally placed feeding tube (NPFT) increase the risks of drug related problems.

Objective

Characterize drugs prescribed to patients with NPFT and compare the rates of polypharmacy and high-alert medication use at admission and hospital discharge.

Design and setting

Multicenter cross-sectional study with 327 participants.

Methods

Data of patients with NPFT were obtained from the medical records and recorded in an electronic data collection tool. Mean number of drugs, polypharmacy and number of high-alert medications prescribed on admission and at discharge were compared using Wilcoxon or McNemar's tests. Generalized Estimating Equations analyzed the relationship between polypharmacy and high-alert medications according to age and time point. Primary reason for hospital admission, level of consciousness, severity of comorbid diseases and patient care complexity were also assessed.

Results

Most patients were male, older people, hospitalized for circulatory system diseases and had at least one comorbidity. On admission, a significant number of patients were alert (59.9%), at high risk for death (43.1%) and high dependent on nursing care (35.4%). Additionally, 92% patients were on polypharmacy on admission, versus 84.7% at hospital discharge (p = 0,0011). The occurrence of polypharmacy was independent of age (p = 0.2377). >17% of all drugs prescribed were high-alert medications, with no statistically significant difference between admission and discharge (p = 0,3957). There was no statistical evidence that the use of high-alert medications increases with age (n = 0,5426).

Conclusions

These results support the planning of multidisciplinary qualified actions for patients using NPFT.

Application of trigger tools for detecting adverse drug events in older people: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To identify trigger tools applied to detect adverse drug events (ADEs) in older people and describe their utility and performance.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in the PubMed, Lilacs, and Scopus databases (January 2024). Studies that developed, applied, or validated trigger tools and evaluated their utility and/or performance for detecting ADEs in older people were considered. Direct proportion meta-analyses using the inverse-variance method were performed for prevalence of ADEs and positive predictive value (PPV).

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies (25 publications) were included. Twelve trigger tools were identified, of which six were developed for detecting ADEs in older population, four developed for general population and modified for older people, and two developed for general population. No tools for detecting ADEs in older people receiving palliative care or hospitalized in intensive or surgical care units were found. The performance of triggers was presented through PPV (11.5-71%), negative predictive values (83.3%), and sensitivity (30-94.8%). The overall PPV was 33.3% (95%CI: 32.5-34.2%). Triggers with good performance were changes in plasma levels of digoxin, glucose, and potassium; changes in international normalized ratio; abrupt medication stop; hypotension; and constipation. The prevalence of ADEs ranged from 2.8 to 66%, with overall prevalence of ADEs of 20% (95%CI: 19.3-20.8%). Preventability ranged from 8.4 to 94.4%. Metabolic or electrolyte disturbances induced by diuretics, constipation induced by opioids, and falls and delirium induced by benzodiazepines were the most prevalent ADEs.

CONCLUSION

The trigger tools are flexible and easy to apply, and they can contribute to the detection of ADEs, their associated risk factors, the level of harm, and preventability in different health settings. However, there is no consensus on good or poor values of PPV, which indicate the performance of triggers. Furthermore, there is limited evidence regarding the evaluation of performance through negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity.

PROSPERO

CRD42022379893.

Active monitoring of antifungal adverse events in hospitalized patients based on Global Trigger Tool method

Background

The increasing prevalence of fungal infections necessitates broader use of antifungal medications. However, the prevalence of adverse drug events (ADEs) restricts their clinical application. This study aimed to develop a reliable ADEs trigger for antifungals to enable proactive ADEs monitoring, serving as a reference for ADEs prevention and control.

Methods

This investigation comprises two phases. Initially, the trigger was established via a literature review, extraction of relevant items, and refinement through Delphi expert consultation. Subsequently, the validity of the trigger was assessed by analyzing hospital records of antifungal drug users from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. The correlation between each trigger signal and ADEs occurrence was examined, and the sensitivity and specificity of the trigger were evaluated through the spontaneous reporting system (SRS) and Global Trigger Tool (GTT). Additionally, risk factors contributing to adverse drug events (ADEs) resulting from antifungal use were analyzed. Results: Twenty-one preliminary triggers were refined into 21 final triggers after one expert round. In the retrospective analysis, the positive trigger rate was 65.83%, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 28.75%. The incidence of ADEs in inpatients was 28.75%, equating to 44.58 ADEs per 100 admissions and 33.04 ADEs per 1,000 patient days. Predominant ADEs categories included metabolic disturbances, gastrointestinal damage, and skin rashes. ADEs severity was classified into 36 cases at grade 1, 160 at grade 2, and 18 at grade 3. The likelihood of ADEs increased with longer stays, more positive triggers, and greater comorbidity counts.

Conclusion

This study underscores the effectiveness of the GTT in enhancing ADEs detection during antifungal medication use, thereby confirming its value as a monitoring tool.

Performance of a trigger tool for detecting adverse drug reactions in patients with polypharmacy acutely admitted to the geriatric ward

Aim

To investigate the performance of an adverse drug reaction (ADR) trigger tool in patients with polypharmacy acutely admitted to our geriatric ward.

Findings

The ADR trigger tool had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 41.8%. Usual care recognised 83.5% of ADRs considered as possible, probable or certain, increasing to 97.1% when restricted to probable and certain ADRs.

Message

It is unlikely that implementation of the ADR trigger tool will improve detection of unrecognised ADRs in older patients acutely admitted to our geriatric ward.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41999-022-00649-x.

Purpose

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) account for 10% of acute hospital admissions in older people, often under-recognised by physicians. The Dutch geriatric guideline recommends screening all acutely admitted older patients with polypharmacy with an ADR trigger tool comprising ten triggers and associated drugs frequently causing ADRs. This study investigated the performance of this tool and the recognition by usual care of ADRs detected with the tool.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was performed in patients ≥ 70 years with polypharmacy acutely admitted to the geriatric ward of the University Medical Centre Utrecht. Electronic health records (EHRs) were screened for trigger–drug combinations listed in the ADR trigger tool. Two independent appraisers assessed causal probability with the WHO-UMC algorithm and screened EHRs for recognition of ADRs by attending physicians. Performance of the tool was defined as the positive predictive value (PPV) for ADRs with a possible, probable or certain causal relation.

Results

In total, 941 trigger–drug combinations were present in 73% (n = 253/345) of the patients. The triggers fall, delirium, renal insufficiency and hyponatraemia covered 86% (n = 810/941) of all trigger–drug combinations. The overall PPV was 41.8% (n = 393/941), but the PPV for individual triggers was highly variable ranging from 0 to 100%. Usual care recognised the majority of ADRs (83.5%), increasing to 97.1% when restricted to possible and certain ADRs.

Conclusion

The ADR trigger tool has predictive value; however, its implementation is unlikely to improve the detection of unrecognised ADRs in older patients acutely admitted to our geriatric ward. Future research is needed to investigate the tool’s clinical value when applied to older patients acutely admitted to non-geriatric wards.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41999-022-00649-x.